Teaching Quality Manual 2010/11

(including taught elements of research programmes, including MRes, DNursSci, EngD)

For Undergraduate and Taught Postgraduate Programmes

Edition 15.5 Revised February 2011

DISCLAIMER
The University is in the process of revising its academic infrastructure moving towards a College-based system. During the 2010/11 session, while Schools and Colleges enjoy equal status as the main academic units of the University, all references to Colleges outlined in the Teaching Quality Manual shall also apply to Schools. (Similarly, references to Colleges should also apply to the Department of Adult Continuing Education). This edition of the Manual reflects the changed regulatory structures for quality assurance as approved by Senate in December 2010. It supersedes all previous versions of the Teaching Quality Manual, including that published in October 2010. Accordingly, while every reasonable effort is made to ensure that the information provided in this Manual is true and accurate upon publishing, no guarantees for the currency or accuracy of the information are made and Swansea University accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss, damage or inconvenience caused as a result of reliance on such information.

[This page left intentionally blank]

ii

PREFACE
Swansea Universitys Teaching Quality Manual outlines the strategic direction for learning and teaching, and the quality infrastructure that underpins the assurance of standards and enhancement of quality. With the confidence expressed in University procedures through the 2008 QAA Institutional Review, and in response to the expectations of external funding and quality assurance bodies, the University is placing an increasing emphasis on quality enhancement. This is embodied in the establishment of the Swansea Academy of Learning and Teaching (SALT), which is pursuing a programme of enhancement-led activities. The University shall shortly introduce a new engagement approach with Colleges/Schools which has at its core the guiding principles of the enhancement of the student experience and the promotion of a more collaborative approach with Colleges/Schools in achieving this objective. Allied to this, a new risk based approach is currently being developed with provision for the undertaking of a College/School cause for concern audit where necessary. Prior thematic reviews have been renamed Enhancement Reviews and are more closely aligned with the Universitys key enhancement themes which guide the promotion of high quality learning, teaching and student support. The University retains a firm commitment to ensuring that procedures for annual programme monitoring, responding to student feedback (including module reviews, and National Student Survey results) and undertaking periodic programme review, ensure that programmes are assessed with appropriate rigour. In 2011 the QAA are consulting on changes to its Academic Infrastructure with proposals to create a single Code of Practice (the currently proposed terminology), in which different elements would be embedded, such as benchmark statements and the credit and qualifications framework. Elements of this infrastructure are subject to regular revision and we will evaluate our policies and procedures against these revisions to ensure that they continue to reflect best practice. We will also continue to use a wide range of external information and best practice in benchmarking our own performance. We remain confident that the broad principles which underline our Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy are consistent with the QAA Code of Practice. A useful chart summarising the key objectives of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy is provided in Section 1.2. Note that there are various substrategies which support the delivery of learning and teaching at Swansea, including the e-Learning Strategy, Skills and Employability Strategy, Information Skills Strategy, and Quality Enhancement Strategy. During 2010, following the establishment of Colleges, the quality infrastructure and related procedures contained in this Manual were revised. The significant elements of these changes include:

iii

The devolution of authority for approval of new modules and major changes to modules to Colleges. Colleges are now responsible for ensuring that all necessary internal approvals and documentation has been completed prior to the validation of new, or revalidation of existing, programmes. Validations will be undertaken by Panels of the new Academic Boards. The approval of external examiner nominations by Academic Boards (special cases to be approved by the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee). Professional body reports and College responses/action plans are to be considered by the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee. The proposed return to two deadlines for submission of external examiners reports according to whether they are undergraduate (July) or taught postgraduate (December 15th).

Alongside changes to the quality infrastructure, new or substantially amended sections of this Manual for 2010/11 include: The introduction of the revised Assessment Policy; Related developments on feedback on examinations, guidance on contact hours and assessment loading in the development of modules; Procedures for the introduction of new award nomenclature; Updated proformas for student placements/study abroad; Mandatory feedback on examinations; Clarification that external examiners must not second mark work, including dissertations; Policy on how to address illegible examination scripts; Confirmation that action points identified during periodic review/professional body reviews must be included in the AMMP proformas, and progress towards those actions must be discussed; The proposed development of generic module feedback forms; The development of a risk based approach to reviewing key academic quality indicators at subject level and, where necessary instigating a process of school engagement, or cause for concern audit, where necessary; Policy on recording of lectures.

Following the establishment of Colleges, the University will be moving towards a more collaborative approach to facilitate the embedding of university policy and the identification and dissemination of good practice. Staff of the Academic Registry, ISS, Staff Development Unit and SALT are committed to providing high quality professional support to colleagues in Schools in interpreting and implementing the policies and procedures contained within this Manual. It is proposed to introduce this approach of collaborative school engagement during the 2010/11 session. I very much hope that this manual will assist you in supporting and enhancing a high quality student experience at Swansea. Professor Alan Speight Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Experience and Academic Quality Enhancement) January 2011
iv

CONTENTS
Section 1: Infrastructure for Academic Quality and Standards ........................... 1 1.1 Purpose of this Manual .................................................................................... 1 1.2 Strategic Directions Supporting Learning, Teaching and Assessment ............ 2 1.3 Quality Assurance Committee Structures ........................................................ 5 1.4 Summary of Quality Assurance Procedures .................................................. 10 Section 2: Introducing Programmes of Study and Establishing Partnerships . 11 2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 11 2.2 Procedures for the Approval and Validation of New Programmes of Study... 12 2.3 Procedures for Collaborative Provision Activities .......................................... 21 2.4 Due Diligence and External Review of Collaborative Partners ...................... 27 2.5 Management of Collaborative Arrangements ................................................ 30 2.6 Introducing New Award Nomenclature .......................................................... 35 2.7 Guidelines on Placement Learning ................................................................ 36 Section 3: Modifying and Concluding Programmes of Study ............................ 43 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 43 3.2 Procedures for Making Changes to Programmes of Study............................ 43 3.3 Procedures for Programmes which are to be Discontinued or Suspended ... 48 3.4 Changes in Programme Administration ......................................................... 50 3.5 Procedures for Approving and Changing Modules ........................................ 51 3.6 Guidelines on Contact Hours ......................................................................... 54 3.7 Assessment Tariff Guidelines ........................................................................ 56 Section 4: Assessment and Award of Qualifications .......................................... 57 4.1 General Information ....................................................................................... 57 4.2 Policy on Assessment ................................................................................... 58 4.3 Feedback on Examinations ........................................................................... 59 4.4 Policy on Electronic Submission of Assessed Work ...................................... 60 4.5 Policy on Retention of Assessed Work .......................................................... 60 4.6 Use of Turnitin Plagiarism Detection Software .............................................. 64 4.7 Policy on Anonymous Marking ...................................................................... 67 4.8 Policy on Double Marking .............................................................................. 68 4.9 Policy on the Submission of Illegible Examination Scripts ............................. 73 4.10 Guidelines on Assessment Other than the Language of Tuition .................... 73 4.11 Adjustments in Teaching, Learning and Assessment Processes for Students with Special Circumstances ...................................................... 75 4.12 Regulations for External Examining of Taught Programmes ......................... 76 4.13 Administrative Matters in Nominating/Appointing External Examiners .......... 82 Section 5: Monitoring Programmes ...................................................................... 85 5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 85 5.2 Procedure for Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes (AMMP0) .... 85 5.3 Policy on Student Feedback .......................................................................... 99 5.4 External Examiners Reports ....................................................................... 102 Section 6: Maintaining Standards and Enhancing Quality ............................... 109 6.1 Overview ..................................................................................................... 109
v

6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6

Procedure for Periodic Programme Review ................................................ 110 Professional Body Reports .......................................................................... 120 Academic Quality Indicators Review ........................................................... 123 External Input into Programme Design, Approval Monitoring and Review .. 124 Enhancement Reviews ................................................................................ 124

Section 7: Delivering Programmes Support for Learning and Teaching ..... 129 7.1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 129 7.2 Management of Programmes ...................................................................... 129 7.3 Monitoring Academic Progress .................................................................... 130 7.4 Attendance Policy ........................................................................................ 131 7.5 Administrative Changes ............................................................................... 131 7.6 Pastoral Care............................................................................................... 132 7.7 Policy on Recording Lectures ...................................................................... 134 7.8 Policy on Supervision of Postgraduate Taught Masters Students Taught Masters Dissertations ................................................................... 138 7.9 Policy on Learning and Professional Development ..................................... 141 7.10 Information for Students .............................................................................. 144 7.11 Support from Information Services and Systems......................................... 144 7.11 Embedding Employability Issues ................................................................. 147 7.12 Support for Academic Staff Development .................................................... 150 Section 8: Other University Publications and Documents ............................... 153 Appendices: Appendix 1: Appendix 2: Appendix 3: Appendix 4: Appendix 5: Appendix 6: Appendix 7: Appendix 8: Appendix 9: Appendix 10: Appendix 11: Appendix 12: Appendix 13: Appendix 14:

Programme Approval and Validation - Flow Chart Approval of Facilitation Agreements - Flow Chart List of award nomenclature Suspending or terminating programmes Flow Chart Nomination of an External Examiner (for all Taught Programmes) Flow Chart An Outline of the Links between AMMP, Periodic Review and School Audit Flow Chart Quality Procedures for Dealing with External Examiners Reports Flow Chart Process for Dealing with Professional Bodies Reports Flow Chart Record of Supervision CEIG / LEAP Policies: The Careers Service CEIG Outcomes Peer Observation of Review of Teaching Timetable for Monitoring/Review Events Web Links to Guidance and Proformas on the Intranet

vi

SECTION 1: INFRASTRUCTURE FOR ACADEMIC QUALITY AND STANDARDS

1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS MANUAL

The Teaching Quality Manual primarily outlines the quality control, assurance and enhancement mechanisms in place to assure the quality and standards of teaching, learning and the student experience and that underpin the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy. This Manual covers the design and approval of new programmes of study, what changes are permitted and the procedures for suspending or terminating a programme. There are also sections covering how the quality of teaching and academic standards are monitored on an annual basis and reviewed more rigorously by internal and external methods. There is a section which provides an overview of the University's policies on assessment, (details of the regulations and procedures concerning assessment may be found in the universitys on-line Academic Guide). A timetable outlining the main monitoring and review events may be found in Appendix 13. External policy developments continue to have a significant impact on the policies and procedures contained in this Manual. The QAA has recently concluded a major review of the academic infrastructure - the Code of Practice, Programme Specifications, Framework for Higher Education Qualifications and HE Progress Files and there is a consultation on proposed changes in early 2011. The Manual will continue to be reviewed and, where necessary updated, as the revised sections of the Code of Practice are published and where there are any further changes to the other components of the academic infrastructure. In 2004, the document Higher Education in Wales: Credit Specification and Guidance was issued and provides clear advice on the use of levels and of level descriptors in a modular environment. The section of this manual relating to Approving and Changing modules Section 3.5 (and also related sections of the online Academic Guide) has consequently been revised in light of this guidance document. All award regulations have been revised with reference to both the QAAs Framework for Higher Education Qualifications and the JQI Dublin Descriptors which have been adopted in the European Qualifications Framework. The QAA has recently undertaken a self-verification to compare the European framework and those adopted in England Wales and Northern Ireland. Guidance notes for developing new programmes refer to these external reference points. This continual monitoring of external developments and their impacts on Swanseas procedures ensures that our quality assurance mechanisms are robust, take account of the QAAs Code of Practice and have proved to be fit for purpose following the 2008 Institutional Review. We are mindful that there are continual enhancements to HE policies and procedures internally and externally and therefore keep these procedures under review. The University's ability to demonstrate the robustness of these procedures depends on a critical resource: our staff. Colleagues responsible for managing and providing
Section 1 1

support for taught programmes should therefore ensure that they are aware of the procedures and apply them consistently. 1.2 STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS SUPPORTING LEARNING, TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT 1.2.1 Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy The Universitys mission, as outlined in its Strategic Plan is to deliver an outstanding student experience, with teaching of the highest quality, which produces graduates equipped for distinguished personal and professional achievement. The Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy provides the framework to assure and enhance the quality and standards of its teaching, learning and assessment practices and the student learning experience. The Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy was first developed in 1999 (known as a Learning and Teaching Strategy) and involved eleven principles. The present Strategy groups the original principles into 5 key aims and consequently makes assessment explicit, hence the revision to the Strategys name. These aims and some of the more specific objectives have been summarised in the following chart. The full version of the Strategy, including more detailed objectives is available from the Quality Office or on the Academic Registrys website (http://www.swansea.ac.uk/registry/A-ZGuide/L/). During 2010/11 there shall be a major review of the strategy and a new one presented to HEFCW for implementation covering the period 2011-2014. 1.2.2 Sub-strategies Underpinning Learning, Teaching and Assessment Underpinning the learning, teaching and assessment strategy are a number of interrelated strategies which include the: e-learning strategy quality enhancement strategy skills and employability strategy widening access strategy information literacy strategy human resource strategy

These help to guide overarching priorities for 2010/11 including: Implementing the recommendations of the First year student experience enhancement review; Implementing the new assessment policy ; Implementing the skills and employability strategy; Teaching and learning in large groups; International Student Experience; Conducting an enhancement review of support for Disabled Students (with reference to the QAA Code of Practice). This will include introduction of the specific policy for alternative assessments for disabled students.
Section 1

In 2009, the Swansea Academy for Learning and Teaching was launched. Acting initially as a virtual Centre, the SALT seeks to support the dissemination of good practice and the enhancement of learning and teaching and is instrumental in disseminating enhancements and good practice arising from the above priorities and other key objectives of the learning, teaching and assessment strategies. 1.2.3 Distance and E-learning Swansea University offers a limited amount of its provision via distance learning. There are a small number of modules and programmes taught through videoconferencing and the University is in the process of developing e-learning provision to be delivered remotely. The University recognises and emphasises that students studying remotely have the right to a student experience that is comparable to that of traditional campus based students. Colleges should ensure that the student experience is comparable with regard to The provision of programme and/or module information The level and availability of academic and personal support The provision of study materials Assessment including examinations (noting the requirement that examinations take place on campus) Opportunities for student feedback and inter-learner discussion All distance learning courses are treated on an equitable basis with regard to the assurance and enhancement of academic quality. All provision is subject to the standard procedures for approval, validation, annual monitoring and periodic review. In addition programme or module leaders need to ensure that the delivery system in place is fit for purpose and reliable and that there are contingency plans in place in the event of a failure of the system. All staff involved in developing distance learning are encouraged to seek relevant training from the Staff Development Unit.

Section 1

A Summary of the Universitys Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy

AIM 1: Improved Learning Experience AIM 2 : Supporting Teaching Staff AIM 3 : Enhancing Quality and Maintaining Standards AIM 4 : Promoting Employability AIM 5 : Valid and Fair Assessment

Objectives
1. Ensuring appropriateness of learning, teaching and assessment methods 2. Improving Learning Environment and Support Services 3. Providing Equality of Opportunity (to address Widening Access student needs) 1. To support and recognise teaching excellence 2. To communicate issues affecting teaching and learning, in particular quality assurance issues 1. Ensuring that internal quality procedures are communicated and up-todate 2. To identify and disseminate best practice, esp. teaching and learning innovations 3. Reviewing performance 1. Embedding Key Skills and Employability within curriculum 2. Helping to develop College employability policies 3. Promoting work experience 4. Developing student autonomy through continuous professional development 1. Implementation of the new Skills Strategy, including Skills Award. 2. Re-launch PebblePad as means of supporting PDP activity. 3. Continue to implement an Information Literacy Strategy. 4. Implement enhancement theme of employability 5. Provide training for research students on research skills and methods. 1. Ensure that assessment approaches are appropriate, fair and valid, reflecting learning and teaching methods, and are clearly stated for the benefit of students, staff and external examiners.

How the Objectives will be achieved?

1. Further implementation of the Peer Assistant Student Support (PASS) programme Enhancement review of students with disabilities. Enhancement themes of teaching and learning in large groups and international student experience Continued Review of student experience in light of campus expansion plans. Increasing the range of Welsh-medium provision in a targeted list of subjects 1. Distinguished Teaching Awards to reward staff excellence. 2. Learning Technologists to assist in transfer of academic material to Blackboard platform and in promoting distance/elearning. 3. Swansea Academy of Learning and Teaching to continue to support the dissemination and adoption of practice 4. Critically review opportunities for improved engagement with the HE Academy 5. Continued delivery of SALT newsletter 6. Continued Staff Development sessions, incl HEA recognition for course for new staff 1. Implement a new approach of College engagement Annual review of academic quality indicators and provision of software to support annual monitoring and periodic programme review. Cross-faculty approach for reviewing AMMP and NSS responses. Continued implementation of periodic programme review Disseminate good practice in learning and teaching via SALT web pages and also annual L&T event Dissemination of best practice from e-learning targets
Section 1

1.

2.

2. 3.

2.

Support Colleges in revising their assessment policy in light of new institutional policy. Implementing policy on alternative assessments for disabled students

3. 4.

4.

5.

5.

6.

1.3

QUALITY ASSURANCE COMMITTEE STRUCTURES

1.3.1 Introduction The Universitys Committee Structure was stream-lined in the 2004/05 session to increase efficiency and transparency and to ensure it supported the University in meeting the objectives laid down in the Universitys mission statement and Strategic Plan. With the formation of six academic Colleges from ten academic Colleges, it was considered that the Faculty structure which was in place would be inappropriate in an academic environment which would mean that Colleges would be co-terminus with Faculties. This would question the independence of a Faculty in the discharge of its academic decision making and in the need for impartiality. Consequently, the University embarked upon a consultation process in 2010 to consider replacing the existing Faculties with a structure which would ensure independence and impartiality, whilst allowing Colleges to function with a greater element of autonomy. The main recommendations and comment arising from the consultation were as follows: to remove unnecessary duplication of work to delegate certain functions which have previously been undertaken by Faculties, to Colleges to ensure that the University continues to be able to discharge its responsibility in safeguarding the standards of its awards through efficient central quality management systems

The revision to the quality structure of the University prompted a review of the Universitys academic and quality procedures, regulations, committee structures (including terms of reference) and reporting lines. This is reflected in the remaining revised sections to this version of the Quality Manual. The following infrastructure for academic quality is therefore the result of the approvals made by Senate and Council to changes to the committee and Faculty structures. While overall responsibility for academic quality lies with Council and with Senate, the following infrastructure describes the way in which this responsibility has been delegated to University committees and sub-committees. The Committee Membership and Terms of Reference documents are updated and published on the Universitys website and on the Intranet regularly throughout the year. At the start of each academic session all University committees review their terms of reference, constitutions and membership and make recommendations for changes to the body to which they report. The Nominations Committee, following a review of its remit in June 2007, oversees membership of the Universitys Council and Council Committees and conducts periodic and high-level reviews of the terms of reference, constitutions and membership of all University committees to ensure they remain fit for purpose and operate effectively. 1.3.2 Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee The Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee is responsible for the consideration of detailed academic issues in particular affecting the academic regulations of the University and the assessment rules. It is one the main Committees of Senate and receives reports from the Academic Boards to which
Section 1 5

Colleges report. It may also advise the Learning and Teaching Committee, Collaborative Provision Committee and Use of Welsh Committee. The Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee is now the principal committee of the University charged with the task of assuring and controlling academic quality (previously this responsibility was that of the Learning and Teaching Committee). The Committee takes an institutional oversight of matters arising from external examiners reports and considers in detail, the responses to professional body reports. It also considers how external quality assurance developments should be addressed e.g. programme specifications and the QAAs qualifications framework. It oversees and co-ordinates the Universitys response to external review at institutional and subject level. In practice, the committee provides a key quality control function on the operation of Academic Boards it requires evidence that Academic Boards have monitored College responses to external examiners reports and considers institutional issues that the Academic Board raises. For taught programmes it also seeks evidence that annual programme monitoring reports have been received and considered, along with periodic programme review reports. The Committee may be asked to consider nominations for external examiners, subject to special circumstances which contravene the criteria for appointment. The Committees role is to consider institutional matters that might arise from external examiners reports and to liaise with the Learning and Teaching Committee to disseminate good practice across the institution. Outside this normal schedule of quality assurance and control mechanisms, the Committee, via the Chair, is empowered to undertake ad-hoc cause for concern audits/reviews of subjects or Colleges based on information from e.g. complaints, appeals, student feedback mechanisms or other quality assurance sources which indicate more serious concerns regarding the maintenance of standards or assurance of the student learning experience. 1.3.4 Academic Boards There are three Academic boards, being responsible for undergraduate, taught postgraduate and research postgraduate programmes respectively. Each reports directly to the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee. Academic Boards have a wide ranging remit to oversee the quality of teaching, learning and assessment, to monitor student progress and conduct and to make recommendations for the award of degrees, diplomas, certificates etc on behalf of the University/University of Wales. (The Senate has final authority for the award of degrees etc). The Academic Boards may establish sub-committees to undertake these functions. Academic Boards are responsible for the assurance and enhancement of quality relating to the relevant undergraduate, taught postgraduate or research student provision. For example, Academic Boards (or their sub-committees) consider the reports of external examiners to ensure that Colleges have or are planning to address issues relating to learning and teaching, monitors that Colleges have
6 Section 1

undertaken annual programme monitoring and, where scheduled, periodic programme review. Academic Boards are also responsible for the validation and review of programmes. The Academic Board considers and approves nominations for external examiners and makes recommendations for appointments as appropriate (a list of those approved being submitted to the RQSC with final authority for approval resting with Senate). 1.3.5 Learning and Teaching Committee The committee has both the responsibility and the authority to determine and to implement policy with respect to all aspects of learning and teaching at the University. The Committee develops the Universitys Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy, reviews progress and sets targets to be achieved. It considers and approves related underpinning strategies, e.g. quality enhancement, skills, widening access and monitors achievement of targets in line with overall strategic University objectives. It is the principal Committee with oversight of enhancing the student learning experience. The Committee supports Colleges in adopting University learning, teaching and assessment policy through enhancement reviews and engagements with Colleges. It considers institutional issues raised by various student feedback mechanisms and monitors College responses to subject-level issues. 1.3.3 Learning and Teaching Committee Sub-Committees The Learning and Teaching Committee has two sub-committees, to which responsibility for aspects of learning and teaching issues have been devolved. There are links with the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee as required on issues relating to new or amended quality procedures. E-Learning Sub-Committee The E-Learning Sub-Committee is responsible for the development of a Strategy to promote the co-ordination and use of distance and computer based teaching and learning. Subsequent to a benchmarking exercise in 2008/09, the sub-committee will monitor the achievement of key e-learning priorities in 2009/10 and 2010/11. The sub-committee also reviews the quality assurance implications that arise from these modes of delivery and identifies what amendments are required to University policies and procedures. Widening Access sub-committee The Widening Access sub-committee was formalised in 2009/10, operating previously as a working party. The sub-committee is largely responsible for developing, monitoring and reviewing the Widening Access Strategy and in ensuring its alignment with the broader university strategic priorities.

Section 1

1.3.6 Collaborative Provision Committee The Collaborative Provision Committee is now a Senate Committee with responsibility for all matters relating to the validation and/or franchising of Certificates, Diplomas or Degrees of Swansea University and Degrees of the University of Wales provided by Swansea University under franchise or outreach agreements. The Collaborative Provision Committee, through the Academic Registrar, is responsible for the administration of validated and franchised programmes, assisting Colleges in the assurance and enhancement of quality and the proper implementation of the University policies. The Committee also oversees all other types of external partnerships, e.g. exchange agreements (students and staff), proposals for Erasmus Mundus-funded programmes and also partnership agreements which are primarily admission-related agreements, recognising the syllabus pursued by students elsewhere. 1.3.6 College Committee Structure Each College is required to operate an effective committee structure for the assurance of the quality of its Learning and Teaching provision. Whilst it is acknowledged that Colleges of different sizes may wish to approach this requirement in different ways, Senate has resolved that each must include the following key committees: College Management Committee College Learning and Teaching Committee College Student-Staff Committee College Staff Committee

College Management Committee The College Management Committee is the main committee of the College to which all others reports, and its membership shall be determined by the Head of College. Its function is to determine College policy in light of the Universitys strategies, to implement College policy and to monitor that implementation. All other committees are, procedurally, sub-committees of the College Management Committee which receives, discusses, and where appropriate, implements resolutions of such subcommittees. College Learning and Teaching Committee The function of the College Learning and Teaching Committee is to monitor all aspects of teaching, learning, assessment and programme provision within the College. It is responsible for co-ordinating and conducting programme and module reviews. The membership of the Learning and Teaching Committee shall be determined by the Head of College and may include student representation. At its June 2008 meeting, the Universitys Learning and Teaching Committee approved the adoption of mandatory Terms of Reference for College Learning and Teaching
8 Section 1

Committees. These Terms of Reference are available on the Intranet (see All Documents >Governance and Committees>Terms of Reference College LTC). Terms of Reference for Boards of Studies were also considered at the June 2008 Learning and Teaching Committee were recommended as advisory. These Terms of Reference are available on the Intranet (see All Documents >Governance and Committees>Terms of Reference Boards of Study). College Student-Staff Committee The College Student-Staff Committee is the official forum in which students are encouraged to raise and discuss matters of concern and of information. Membership of the Student-Staff Committee shall be determined by the Head of College, but must include representation from a cross-section of students within the College. Terms of Reference for College Student-Staff committees have also been developed by the Learning and Teaching Committee and are strongly recommended for adoption. These are also on the Intranet (see All Documents >Governance and Committees>Terms of Reference Staff-Student Consultative Committees), however the guidance does not replace the more general guidance as set out in Ordinance 9.4. Staff Committee The College Staff Committee shall meet at least once each term and is normally open to all members of teaching, research, administrative and technical staff within the College.

Section 1

1.4

SUMMARY OF QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES

The standards of our awards and the quality of students learning experiences depend upon: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) the design of modules and programmes and their related assessments; the delivery of modules and opportunities for students independent learning; student support and guidance; monitoring and evaluating modules and programmes; assessment procedures and the award of qualifications.

Further details relating to item 5, assessment procedures, may be found in the University documents, Undergraduate Assessment Regulations, Assessment Regulations for Postgraduate Taught Awards and the on-line Academic Guide.

10

Section 1

SECTION 2: INTRODUCING PROGRAMMES OF STUDY AND ESTABLISHING PARTNERSHIPS

2.1 INTRODUCTION

New programmes of study require approval by various internal committee structures to ensure that the academic quality and standards and programmes resource implications are fully considered. Final approval for a new programme of study lies with the Standing Panel, Validation of each Academic Board of Swansea University which has delegated authority to make these approvals from the Regulations, Standards and Quality Committee. Members of the Standing Panel, Validation form a Validation Panel which includes a subject specialist who is external to Swansea University. The external subject specialist may not be the current or recent external examiner for the College(s) proposing the new programme. During the process of evaluating new programmes, the Admissions Office and Publications Office must be kept informed to ensure that University literature and staff are prepared for the possible intake of new students. The detailed procedures for the approval of new programmes of study are outlined in Section 2.2. The template required to fulfil this process must be completed electronically and access to this system is available through the University Intranet. Technical guidance for staff completing the electronic programme proforma is provided by following Web Link 1 (Appendix 14). To ensure that the standards are maintained, and where possible, enhanced, programmes are monitored regularly as outlined in Section 5 and are subject to comprehensive evaluation as noted in Section 6 of this Manual. Where an existing programme of Swansea University is to be franchised in partnership with another institution or delivered through an outreach arrangement, joint or collaborative degrees are to be introduced; the procedures and Swansea University Code of Practice outlined in Sections 2.3 and 2.4 must be followed. Section 2.5 outlines the ongoing commitments required by Colleges to oversee approved collaborative arrangements. Should the introduction of a new programme also means a new nomenclature, please refer to section 2.6. Section 2.7 lists guidelines for delivering and assuring the quality of placement, including work or study abroad. The QAAs Code of Practice (Section 2: Collaborative Provision, Section 7: Programme Design, Approval, Monitoring and Review and Section 9: Placement Learning) are applicable to the policies and procedures outlined in this section of the Manual.

Section 2

11

2.2

PROCEDURES FOR THE APPROVAL AND VALIDATION OF NEW PROGRAMMES OF STUDY

2.2.1 Introduction These procedures outline how new programmes of study which are to be delivered primarily by Swansea University are to be evaluated and validated. The process is entirely electronic aiming to improve the efficiency and accuracy with which programmes are submitted, considered and approved. 2.2.2 Scope of procedures Normally new programmes require a full validation involving external assessors. However when new proposals are based on the combination of existing programmes, it will be the decision of the Standing Panel, Validation as to whether a full validation is necessary. The University permits current staff from outside the proposing College to act as the external representative when considering programmes of study which lead to an award at Cert HE level or below. These programmes still require the completion of a full programme proposal (the programme proposal template must be completed electronically through the online system https://intranet.swan.ac.uk/mainmenu.asp Under Academic Records> Courses>Programme Creation) and will follow the same process for validation as all other proposals. Note: Additional procedures are in place for any new programme of study that involves a collaborative partner. Further details on these can be found in Sections 2.3 and 2.4. 2.2.3 Programme Regulations or Nomenclature Where a new programme may require amendments to existing regulations or new regulations, the Colleges programme coordinator must also provide details of such to the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee (RQSC). The form REGREQ should be used for this purpose (see Web Link 2, Appendix 14). If this is a new programme, requiring new award nomenclature regulations, please see Section 2.6 of the Teaching Quality Manual for the procedures to be followed. 2.2.4 Period of Approval The first cohort of students is required to enrol upon a validated programme within 5 years of approval. In cases where this does not occur, and/or where the programme has had no enrolments for 5 academic sessions, full revalidation will be required prior to the first or future intakes. Periodic programme review as outlined in Section 6 of the Teaching Quality Manual will be seen to act as the revalidating process in all other instances. 2.2.5 Procedure Stage 1a - College Consideration Please refer to Appendix 1a for a diagram summarising this stage.
12 Section 2

The first stage in considering every new programme of study is at the College level. Initial consideration within the College(s) should take place both informally amongst staff and formally within the College committee structure(s), e.g. at Board of Studies level. (The section Guidelines for the Design of New Programmes in the Approving New Taught Programmes of Study booklet provides assistance to those developing a proposal.) The views of external assessors and, where appropriate, professional bodies, must be sought and must be uploaded into the electronic documentation which the College produces. In addition, the College should undertake appropriate market research and should indicate the extent to which others have been consulted. (It is acknowledged that for certain disciplines market research may be difficult. However, Colleges are expected to demonstrate e.g. by means of admissions queries or labour market information, that a market exists for the proposed programme.) Key questions which must be addressed at College level 1. Does the proposed programme involve external partners?

If the new programme of study involves an external partner, initial discussions should take place between the College and the potential partner institution or organisation in order to explore the detail of any new collaborative proposal. At this stage, the financial and academic details should also be considered and agreed upon. A proforma must be submitted at this stage which is considered by the Collaborative Provision Committee and, where applicable, the Internationalisation Strategic Management Group and provide approval in principle (or otherwise) of the collaborative partner and proposed collaboration. This should be done prior to submission of the proposed programme for validation. See section 2.3 for further details on the required proforma that must be submitted at this stage). 2. Does the proposed programme require new or amendments to regulations?

Where a new programme may require amendments to existing regulations the Colleges programme coordinator must also provide details of such to the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee. The form REG-REQ should be used for this purpose (see Web Link 2, Appendix 14). 3. Does the proposed programme require new award nomenclature?

The procedures outlined in section 2.6 must be followed if the new programme also includes new award nomenclature. 4. Does the proposed programme professional/statutory body? require accreditation by a

If it does, and the professional body is amenable, it would be proposed to organise a joint validation event to expedite the decision. If not, it would be the responsibility of the College to liaise with the professional body regarding a separate validation. 5. Are there sufficient human resource, technical and learning resources within the College to support the new programme?

Section 2

13

Colleges are required to plan accordingly for new initiatives within the context of the areas of development identified in their approved Business Plan(s). It is the responsibility of the College Learning and Teaching Committee/Management Committee to review the feasibility of the proposed programme, with reference to the approved Business Plan of the College. In the case of programmes which involve more than one College, this process must be mirrored in all Colleges concerned. If the programme requires additional resources which are not addressed within the Colleges approved Business Plan(s), a revised Plan must be submitted to the Universitys Senior Management Team for consideration. The Finance Department must confirm that resources are available in all circumstances where additional resources are required, even if the proposed programme is consistent with the areas of development stated in the approved Business Plan. The College must maintain all necessary documentation to confirm the scrutiny of the new programme and its viability from the various parties. Programmes that have no additional resource requirements may be submitted directly to the Standing Panel, Validation. Documentation to be submitted The proposal for a new programme must follow the electronic template found on the Intranet (Academic Records>Courses>Programme Creation). The electronic template ensures that all appropriate details are collected, including the Programme Specification model outlined by the QAA. Programme Specifications are required as part of QAA Institutional Review and the universitys commitment to providing information for students on programme outcomes. In writing the proposal, staff are advised to discuss the programme with Administrative Officers in the Academic Registry, including sections relating to research and/or collaborative initiatives, as appropriate. The section Guidelines for Completion of New Programme Proposals in the Approving New Taught Programmes of Study booklet is available to staff involved in completing the electronic template. The electronic template is further enhanced with guidance to assist staff with its accurate completion. The completed template with all supplementary documentation (e.g. external assessors comments, module outlines, proposed programme handbook, where available) must be submitted electronically through the Programme Creation process. This automatically advises the Administrative Officer who will initiate the next stage of the approval process. The programme documentation as it appears in the Programme Creation database, will, subject to appropriate amendments, be the final version which is to be considered at the Validation Event. Stage 1b Collaborative Provision Consideration (ONLY FOR PROGRAMMES OF STUDY INVOLVING EXTERNAL PARTNERS) Any programme that involves a collaborative partner will need to be referred to the Collaborative Provision Committee for approval of the collaborative partner and the proposed collaboration. As part of this process a due diligence review will be carried
14 Section 2

out on the partner institution. For further information on the review and approval process for new programmes of study involving collaborative partners see Sections 2.3 and 2.4 of this Manual. Stage 2 - External Validation Please refer to Appendix 1b for a diagram summarising this stage. The template, with associated documentation must be complete, with all necessary consultation with relevant bodies, including Finance and the Collaborative Provision Committee (if necessary) being undertaken by the College prior to submission for consideration by the Academic Board, specifically its Standing Panel, Validation. The Associate Dean of the Academic Board concerned (undergraduate, taught postgraduate and/or research as appropriate) and Administrative Officer will undertake a preliminary scrutiny of the documentation to ensure that it is sufficiently detailed. Proposals without sufficient detail will be referred back to the College for updating. Members of the Standing Panel, Validation are provided with the Approving New Taught Programmes of Study booklet to assist in their evaluation. Following submission of the template, an Administrative Officer in the Academic Registry shall: (i) initiate Swansea Universitys Validation Process by checking the comprehensiveness of the submission and liaising with the Associate Dean on the necessity of further information. (ii) In the case of proposals involving a collaborative partner, liaise with the Secretary to the Collaborative Provision Committee so that the necessary documentation regarding the external partner(s) and their role, such as the draft Memorandum of Agreement between all partners be available to the Committee and a representative from the partner institution be available to answer any question that the Standing Panel for Validation might have. (iii) obtain nominations from the proposing subject staff for the names of two external subject specialists to serve on a Validation Panel. (Note: the external subject specialist is encouraged to submit his/her concerns/comments on new programmes to the Administrative Officer, prior to the Validation meeting). Guidelines and the proforma for the nomination and appointment of External Subject Specialists is provided under Web Link 3 (Appendix 14); (iv) organise a Validation Panel, drawing upon members of the Standing Panel, Validation. The constitution of the Validation Panel will depend upon the programme in question but shall include a Dean or Associate Dean (not from the proposing College), the external subject specialist, and two other members of the Standing Panel (not from the subject area from which the programme is being proposed, and, and in the case of collaborative degrees, a member of the Collaborative Provision Committee. Where a proposal is submitted for a new research degree, or research degree with taught elements, there shall be at least one member of the Validation Panel who

Section 2

15

(v) (vi)

(vii) (viii)

shall have sufficient research experience or understanding of related programmes, e.g. EngD, MRes etc; Liaise with the professional body (where appropriate) to organise a joint accreditation event, if this is amenable. ensure that members of the Validation Panel are provided with the Approving New Taught Programmes of Study booklet to assist in their evaluation and that the external subject specialist has the relevant documentation to report his/her recommendations concerning the proposed programme; arrange for servicing the Validation Event, including the monitoring of any conditions and reporting upon the outcomes to the Academic Board; report on the approval of new programmes to the Academic Board and thereon to Senate via a report to the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee.

Members of the Validation Panel must reach agreement on whether or not to approve the programme proposal and clearly identify all conditions which are to be imposed prior to completion of the meeting. Subject to the approval of the Validation Panel, and a satisfactory report by the external subject specialist being submitted, the programme of study shall be deemed to be fully approved and may be delivered. It is the responsibility of the College concerned to address any conditions. This shall be monitored by the Academic Registry and Associate Dean of Academic Board. Students may not enrol on programmes until all conditions have been fulfilled. The Administrative Officer, Academic Registry shall also inform other relevant administrative departments (e.g. Admissions Officer, Student Records Officer, Publications Officer, ISS and the Careers Centre and External Examiners, Academic Registry) of the proposed programme through the electronic tracking system. The Student Record Officer shall ensure that the central database and the national programme database maintained by the Student Loans Company are updated. In the case of programmes involving external partners, the Administrative Officer, Academic Registry shall also inform the Secretary to the Collaborative Provision Committee so that he/she can inform the partner institutions/ organisations of the decision and undertake any necessary action. 2.2.5 Summary A diagrammatic representation of the procedure outlined above may be found in Appendices 1a and 1b. The first cohort of students is required to enrol upon a validated programme within 5 years of approval. In cases where this does not occur full revalidation will be required prior to the first intake. 2.2.6 Validation Timetable New programme proposals are normally validated within one academic session. A typical cycle might be: June/July September/October November/December
16

initial discussions of ideas within the College consideration and approval within the College Where necessary, the Collaborative Provision Committee normal considers proposals at this time.
Section 2

January April

May 15 June July

consideration of any new/amended regulations by the Regulations, Standards and Quality Committee, due diligence reviews by the CP Committee (as necessary) and the holding of the formal Validation Event involving the external subject specialist. fulfilment of any conditions imposed by the Validation Panel prior to the first student intake. Reporting to the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee ratification by Senate

The programme could then be delivered the following September, pending the issues outlined in Section 2.2.8, below. (For programmes with a planned initial student intake other than the normal academic year start should reflect at least a four month lead in time between validation and student intake). Colleges should be aware however of the considerable advance deadlines required to include proposed programmes in the formal University literature, as outlined in Section 2.2.7, following. The Validation timetable and procedures are summarised diagrammatically in Appendix 1b. 2.2.7 Deadlines for University Marketing of the Programme Internal Deadlines The most significant internal deadlines relate to publications for recruitment and the admission processes. In order to ensure that they can be marketed in the appropriate undergraduate prospectus, undergraduate programmes of study need to be approved a full twenty-two months before the admission of the first cohort. Postgraduate programmes of study need to be approved by January of the academic year prior to the academic year in which the programmes are to run. Longer deadlines may be required for Collaborative Programmes where external funding such as Erasmus Mundus funding is being sought. University Prospectus The deadline for copy for the University Undergraduate Prospectus for entry in the year 201X is mid-November of the year 201X-2. Unless programmes have been through the full Swansea University validation process, they must be advertised as provisional. The deadline for copy for the University Postgraduate Prospectus for the year 201X is the beginning of May 201X-1.

UCAS Directory The deadline for copy for the printed version of the UCAS Directory, entry year 201X is mid November of the year 201X-2. Programmes of study which have been approved by the Academic Board by this deadline shall be allocated a UCAS code and advertised Subject to final approval.

Section 2

17

Colleges are reminded that failure to adhere to these deadlines may negatively impact the ability to adequately recruit students to the programme.

2.2.8 Deadlines for the actual validation process College consideration and, where necessary Collaborative Provision Committee scrutiny In order to meet the deadlines, all programmes of study, which might be delivered in September of any given year (e.g. 201X), should normally pass through the Colleges Committees (and, where appropriate, the Collaborative Provision Committee) by the Michaelmas Term of the previous session (201X-1). Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee and Validation Panels Any new programme which is to be introduced in September of a given year (e.g. September 201X) must be approved by Senate by the end of the previous session (i.e. June 201X). This means that amendments to regulations must pass through the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee and that Validation Events must be organised prior to May. The Commencement of New Programmes Notwithstanding the paragraphs above, programmes may commence as follows:
(a)

Programmes which are predominantly combinations of existing components and which complete the validation process by 15 May may be delivered in September of the same year to students who either transfer to such a programme, who are recruited in clearing or who have applied based on marketing material provided by the College; Programmes, which deliver material which is wholly or substantially new, may not normally be delivered until the session after next. This is in order to ensure the recruitment of high calibre students, the consideration of timetabling issues, resolving funding issues, addressing resource implications, the preparation of documentation and lecture material, etc. and the appointment of an external examiner have been fully addressed.

(b)

2.2.9 Responsibilities College It is the responsibility of the College to ensure that all aspects of planning new programmes are completed with the utmost thoroughness. Colleges should appoint a programme director who shall be responsible for guiding the programme through the validation process and who will act as a point of contact for all other members of staff. Amongst other things the Colleges must ensure that:
18

market research has been carried out;

Section 2

programmes are subject to full discussion within the College and with any other College / External Partner involved in teaching; the programme has been addressed in the approved Business Plan. Where this is not the case, the College is responsible for submitting revised Business Plans for approval before submitting the programme proposal to the Standing Panel, Validation; appropriate external advice is sought in the planning stage; full documentation is submitted electronically through the intranet, allowing distribution of the materials to the Standing Panel, Validation and where appropriate the Collaborative Provision Committee; The programme director ensures that all conditions imposed by the Validation Panel are addressed prior to the first student intake; in any recruitment material, programmes of study that have not been formally approved by the external subject specialist appointed by the Academic Registry to review the proposal are clearly advertised as Subject to final approval. That a Board of Study is appointed and that the obligations in delivering a programme of study are adhered to; That any recommendations and/or conditions arising from the Validation are discussed with the external examiner and responses to these outlined in the next Annual Monitoring activity following the first student intake. An external examiner is nominated to the new programme in accordance with the procedures outlined in Sections 4.12 and 4.13 of the Teaching Quality Manual.

Administrative Officer An Administrative Officer of the Academic Registry, on behalf of both the relevant Associate Dean of the Academic Board and the Academic Registrar, is responsible for monitoring and recording the progress of the programme at all stages following College approval. This progress can be viewed by College staff through the Programme Creation database available on the Intranet. Amongst other things, the Administrative Officer shall: scrutinise College submissions to ensure that the College responsibilities have been carried out. If the Administrative Officer is not satisfied that the responsibilities and procedures have been properly discharged he/she may refer the proposal back to the College for further information; notify the Collaborative Provision Committee of any proposal that involve external partner(s) so that the necessary due diligence procedures can be carried out; notify the Admissions Office, Publications Office, Student Records Unit, Library and Information Services and Careers Centre of proposed programmes of study via the electronic programmes database so that their staff can prepare appropriate material for new students and update the necessary University systems; identify, provide information to and liaise with the external subject specialist as necessary; organise the servicing of the Validation Event and report its conclusions to Senate via the Academic Board and the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee;
Section 2 19

monitor, in collaboration with the Associate Dean, the achievement of any conditions imposed on the College for the full approval of the proposed programme and report on the satisfactory completion of conditions to Academic Board; inform the Colleges concerned of any reasons for not validating the proposed programme; In programmes involving external partners inform the Collaborative Provision Committee of the outcome of the Validation for subsequent reporting to the Committee and the partner(s). inform the appropriate officer of requirements relating to the design and wording of degree certificates.

Student Records Officer ensure that the national database of programmes, maintained by the Student Loans Company is updated; ensure that central University databases are updated. Admissions Office Inform Colleges of the new UCAS code (or other codes as appropriate) as soon as they have been determined.

20

Section 2

2.3

PROCEDURES FOR COLLABORATIVE PROVISION ACTIVITIES

2.3.1 Introduction The term Collaborative Provision encompasses a number of ways in which programmes can be delivered to students in a non-traditional manner, normally involving a partner organisation from academia or industry. Examples would include offering validated programmes (i.e. programmes designed, delivered and assessed by a partner institution or organisation, but validated by Swansea University as reaching the required standard for a particular award), franchised programmes (i.e. programmes designed by Swansea University but delivered by the partner institution or organisation), programmes offered jointly by Swansea University and the partner institution or organisation (i.e. where the design of the programme, the teaching, and the assessment is shared between both parties) or possibly programmes offered by Swansea in collaborative with another institution. Swansea University currently offers a growing portfolio of collaborative programmes. The procedures outlined below are to be applied for all collaborative provision programmes, with slight adjustment to suit the nature of individual proposals. Additional guidance is available on the Internet at http://www.swan.ac.uk/registry/InternationalExchangePartnership/CollaborativeProvision/ Due to the dynamic and complex nature of collaborative provision, any College considering a development in this area should contact Mr H Morris (tel: 01792 295344/ email: h.d.l.morris@swan.ac.uk) directly for guidance. All programmes involving a partner organisation from academia or industry must be governed by a Memorandum of Agreement (see section 2.4 below). The Assistant Registrar (Collaboration) is responsible for maintaining an accurate register of all collaborative agreements; therefore any new agreement must be reported to him/her immediately.

Section 2

21

2.3.2 Approval of New Collaborative Proposals In pursuance of the objectives in Section 2: Collaborative Provision and Flexible and Distributed Learning (including E-Learning) of the QAAs Code of Practice published in September 2004, 1and to the end of ensuring that a proper collaborative mechanism is achieved in all instances, the following procedures should be followed. Timeframe for submission of proposals New collaborative programme proposals should normally be received by the Academic Registrar at least one year in advance of a programme's commencement, in order that the appropriate procedures may be carried out thoroughly. Stage 1a - College consideration and consideration of resources Preliminary discussions should be held with the Academic Registrar, and possibly the Collaborative Provision Committee. Normally a proforma recording an expression of interest will need to be completed. Initial discussions should only take place between the College and the potential partner institution or organisation in order to explore the detail of any new collaborative proposal if approved in principle by the University. At this stage, the financial and academic details should also be considered and agreed upon. The Colleges Learning and Teaching Committee must approve any proposals before further action is taken, and endorsed by the Head of College. The College should also ensure that the proposed programme is consistent with the College business plan and does not require any additional resources. If additional resources are required and the programme fits into the Colleges existing business plan, then the proposal should be forwarded to the Finance Department for confirmation and signing off. Central resource requirements might also need to be considered. If additional resources are required and the programme does not fit into the Colleges existing business plan, then the proposal should be forwarded to the Senior Management Team and the Finance Department for financial and strategic approval of the programme, in principle.

Stage 1b - Collaborative Provision Committee review of collaborative partners. Collaborative Provision Approval in principle An outline proposal (see Web Link 4, Appendix 14) should be submitted to the Collaborative Provision Committee in the initial stages of the College discussion of the proposed partnership. The committee or a specialist panel shall consider and approve in principle the new programme proposal. (In the case of facilitation/ partnership/ twinning arrangements this step of the procedure is waived until after the Admissions Committee has carried out the academic scrutiny of the proposal. See 2.3.5 below) The new programme proposal should be prepared using the new programme template which was designed to assist Colleges in preparing new programme submissions to the relevant Standing Panel, Validation (see Section 2.2 and template under Web Link 1, Appendix 14). Additional information may be

Note including the amplification to this section published November 2010 22

Section 2

required such as reference to resource issues and these should be incorporated in the collaborative programme proposal document. For instance, members of staff involved with any teaching on a collaborative programme are invited to submit their curriculum vitae to the relevant partner College within Swansea University as part of the quality assurance procedures relating to the approval of teaching staff from partner institutions. Where appropriate, the curriculum vitae are reviewed for the approval and confirmation of the staff on the collaborative programme. (For facilitation/ partnership/ twinning see 2.3.5 below) Due diligence and review of partners The Collaborative Provision Committee will carry out due diligence and where appropriate an external review of the collaborative partners as detailed in Section 2.4 below. Memorandum of Agreement Following approval in principle of a collaborative proposal a draft Memorandum of Agreement should be drawn up by the Secretary of the Collaborative Provision Committee, as outlined in Section 2.4. The draft Memorandum of Agreement has to be agreed by Swansea University, the associated institution and, where appropriate, the statutory or professional body/bodies concerned. The draft Memorandum of Agreement will set out the responsibilities and duties of each of the partners in order to establish clear and mutual expectations of the collaborative relationship. Sometimes a student agreement might also be necessary. Approval by Collaborative Provision Committee Following approval in principle and the drawing up of a draft Memorandum of Agreement, the detailed proposal should be submitted to the Collaborative Provision Committee. The reports from the specialist panel of assessors, following their review of/visit to the proposed collaborative partner, should be submitted to the Collaborative Provision Committee, along with the draft Memorandum of Agreement. It is at this stage that detailed consideration of all aspects of the proposal takes place, whether academic, financial or resource issues, based on all of the information available. Stage 2 - Outcomes and recommendation to Senate, including where appropriate validation of new programmes by the Academic Board The Collaborative Provision Committee, having satisfied itself of the merit of the partner institution and the proposed programme, will make its recommendation to Senate, and inform the appropriate Standing Panel, Validation of its decision. It should be noted that the Senate may refer the proposal back to the Collaborative Provision Committee and/or the associated institution if it sees fit. 2.3.3 New Collaborative/ Joint Degrees The procedure for the approval and validation of any new joint/ collaborative programme of study will follow the same procedure as outlined in 2.2 above with the additional requirement that due diligence and, where appropriate, an external review be carried out on the proposed partner institution as detailed in 2.4 below.

Section 2

23

2.3.4 Franchise/ Validation or Outreach arrangements Franchising has generally been defined as the process whereby a parent institution authorises an associated institution or organisation, at home or abroad, to deliver, by its own staff, a programme of study leading to completion or part completion of an award of the parent institution, designed by that institution. Such programmes remain the property of the parent institution and participants register as its students. (2 + 2 degree programmes are included in franchise arrangements.) The following basic principles shall be applied: Swansea University must offer the same or a comparable provision through one or more of its Colleges at the same or at a higher level, before a programme can be franchised to another institution. Any franchised programme shall be governed by means of a Memorandum of Agreement, signed on behalf of the University by the Vice-Chancellor or a Pro Vice Chancellor. The written agreement shall represent the recognition that the Awarding Institution is responsible for the academic standards. Consequently Colleges shall be precluded from entering into any formal arrangements for franchising programmes. The Senate, through Collaborative Provision Committee, shall formally approve any new agreements or revisions to agreements governing the franchising of programmes.

Franchising is normally based upon a partnership between Swansea University and an associated institution such as a College of Higher Education, a College of Further Education or, in certain cases, an overseas institution, which offers programmes leading to the award of a qualification of Swansea University. It may also embrace industrial, commercial and other establishments. Certain franchised or collaborative programmes may also be subject to the approval of the relevant statutory or professional body. Wherever possible, that body will be brought into partnership during the approval process in order to achieve an effective academic and professional franchise. The procedures outlined in Sections 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 are intended to encompass all necessary processes to ensure that the programme is academically coherent and at the appropriate level. The process is also designed to ensure that the associated institution or organisation is fit to deliver the programme. In forming this judgement, Swansea University will have regard, among other things, to: the capacity of the potential partner institution or organisation to enter into legal agreement; the ability of the associated institutions to duplicate the structure, content and academic level of the programme and the assessment of students on the programme; the staffing and learning support resources associated with the programme are adequate; the suitability of any professional placements associated with the programme (where appropriate).

24

Section 2

2.3.5 Facilitating/ Partnership/ Twinning Arrangements All potential partnership links with overseas institutions that are focused on recruiting and admitting foreign students for a period of study at Swansea University will mainly be developed and supported by the International Development Office. Facilitation, Articulation, Partnership and Twinning are all terms to describe the type of agreement that has its main focus on the recruitment and admission of students from an overseas institution to Swansea University for a period of study which may or may not lead to the awarding of credit and/or an official Swansea University award. This type of agreement sets out the institutional information, the rationale and aims of the programme and the admissions criteria. There are currently 4 categories of Facilitation agreements: The first facilitates entry to level 1 of undergraduate degrees. (In this case both the Colleges Learning and Teaching Committee and the Admissions Committee must be satisfied that the prior study at the institution concerned is of sufficient quality and standard to allow access to level 1 of Swansea degrees.) The second facilitates the admission of students to Level 2 as a result of their prior study. (In this case the Colleges Learning and Teaching Committee and must be satisfied that the prior study must be of the same level as the study they would have had at Swansea.) The third are those which facilitate entry to a set number of credits at Swansea as part of the students home degrees. For instance, students might study 60 credits of Law modules in Swansea as part of the final year of their four year undergraduate degree. In these cases students receive credit but not an award for their study at Swansea. They may be considered for admission to a Masters Degree (2+1+1). The fourth recognises pre-masters degrees at other institutions, which facilitate entry to masters degrees at Swansea.

A template has been development for the agreement between the overseas institution and Swansea University. It should be completed by the International Development Office/ College interested in developing the agreement and submitted to the Collaborative Provision Committee for approval. (See Web Link 5, Appendix 14) The International Development Office and the Academic Registry shall maintain copies of the agreements between the overseas institutions and Swansea University and the information will be recorded in a central database of collaborative agreements. The approval process for this type of agreement is as follows. It is summarised in Appendix 2.

Section 2

25

Stage 1 - Responsibilities: Head of College/external party Any College/ Individual (e.g. agent/ external party) interested in developing a link between Swansea University and a collaborative partner must complete a simple expression of interest form and send to the International Development Office. During this initial stage, the Head of College will be responsible for assessing the academic implications of such agreements, and for ensuring that neither the quality and standards of Swansea University provision, nor its reputation, is compromised. Stage 2 - Responsibility: International Development Office Staff of the International Development Office will review and research the request. (i.e. check the status and ranking of the institution and if the request has come from an external party, liaise with Colleges at Swansea to determine if they would be interested in pursuing the link). Stage 3 Responsibility: Internationalisation Steering Group The Steering Group or its Chair will review the request and the preliminary findings and determines whether the Steering Group wishes to support the link. If support not granted The International Development Office (IDO) will inform the party requesting the link. If support is given The IDO to contact the relevant College on behalf of the Steering Group to ask them to consider working with the proposed collaborative partner and the agreed parameters in which the agreement would work. (N.B. Any financial arrangement such as a bursary would need to signed off by the Director of Finance.) Providing there School support in principle for the link, a generic Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) is to be drafted (by IDO), and signed by the Pro-VC Internationalisation, signifying Universitys commitment to work together to develop links in various subject areas but that details of the link will need to be negotiated and agreed with individual Colleges. The signed MoU will be forwarded to the Academic Registrar for recording in the Universitys database of agreements and reported to the Collaborative Provision Committee. Stage 4 Colleges interested in pursuing the link to fill in the relevant facilitation form 2 which would need signing off by:
2

the Head of School/ nominated alternate the Head of Admissions/ nominated alternate Director of Finance/ nominated alternative if there financial implications in the form of bursaries. Academic Board (Postgraduate Research) (if link at Research level)

Colleges to liaise with Rob Ward, Admissions Office for advice on entry requirements when filling in the form.

26

Section 2

The form should then be forwarded to the IDO who would write to the collaborative partner informing them of Swanseas agreement to the arrangement and would forward the form to the Secretary of the Collaborative Provision Committee so that the detail of the arrangement could be recorded centrally and reported to the Committee. Stage 5 IDO/ Admissions Committee to track promotional development of link through reviewing on an annual basis the number of students received under link and the progress of the students thereof. These figures are to be reported to the Internationalisation Steering Group and Collaborative Provision Committee as part of the monitoring process of all agreements. They would also be referred to when determining whether to renew an agreement. 2.3.6 Exchange/ Placement/ Study in Lieu Arrangements Any College wishing to set up a new Exchange agreement should follow the approval process for new collaborative proposals defined in Section 2.3.2 above, namely Stage 1 (College consideration and consideration recourses) and Stage 2 (Academic Board and Collaborative Provision Committee review of Academic detail and collaborative partners). Where a new degree programme is not required to be set up, it simply involves the substitution/ addition of a new partner then Academic Board may not require as detailed a consideration of the academic content. However a review of the proposed collaborative partner will be required. Additional guidelines on placement learning can be found in Section 2.7 below. 2.4 DUE DILIGENCE AND EXTERNAL REVIEW OF COLLABORATIVE PARTNERS

2.4.1 Introduction It is incumbent on Swansea University to carry out a due diligence and risk assessment of the proposed partner/ associate institution and collaborative venture proposed before entering into any agreement to set up a joint/ collaborative degree programme. Due diligence is the process of seeking information from the other party by submission of formal questionnaires and the subsequent analysis of information and documents provided. On occasion, Swansea might also seek responses from third parties such as auditors or other collaborators who may provide an additional perspective to the issues raised. The purpose of the exercise is to attempt to manage the risk that might arise in relation to working in collaboration and regardless of whether the other party is 10 or 10,000 miles away, many of the same considerations will be of relevance. Questions to reflect upon when carrying out a due diligence review of the partner institution are as follows: 1. What are the risks involved in such a collaboration? 2. Is it possible to quantify these risks? 3. Can the institution minimise or transfer any risks?
Section 2 27

4. 5.

Is it possible to quantify the residual risk after any minimisation or transfer has occurred? Will it be possible to have ongoing monitoring of the venture as a means of managing a risk?

A starting point will be an examination of the legal status of the prospective partner, which is relevant to the partys capacity to enter into a contract. There is no prescribed manner in which due diligence should be undertaken, except that it should be completed before Swanseas resources are committed to any binding obligations. Issues to be considered: Organisational Chart Details of any litigation past and present Adverse press coverage Details of insurance cover Staffing strategy (Details of staff that will teach on collaborative programme and strategy to ensure appropriate staff/ student ratio) Data/ information exchange (e.g. what data protection legislation is applicable) Health/ Safety assessments Professional/ international accreditation/ memberships Quality assurance organisations Governmental approval/ permits As part of the due diligence procedure the Academic Registrar, on behalf of the Collaborative Provision Committee, may establish a panel of assessors with appropriate experience and expertise to assess both the overall structure of the proposal and the associated institution. Where appropriate, a visit will be arranged by the panel of assessors to the prospective partner institution. For further information on the role of the panel see Section 2.4.3 below. 2.4.2 Documentation required as part of the approval process for collaborative programmes. Review reports will be prepared to support the further development of the proposed collaboration, for submission to and consideration by the Collaborative Provision Committee. A draft Memorandum of Agreement and possible a student agreement will also need to be drawn up with support from the Secretary to the Collaborative Provision Committee using the prescribed template for collaborative agreements. 2.4.3 Panel of Assessors It is incumbent on Swansea University, through the Collaborative Provision Committee, to judge the fitness of the associated partners to deliver the collaborative programme for the award of Swansea University unless the status of the proposed partner would suggest that this requirement could be waived. Therefore, the procedures outlined below will be followed. In the case of 2+2 type collaborative arrangements, Swansea University will also judge the merit of the programme. It
28 Section 2

shall do so by adopting the appropriate validation procedures or by recognising the validation granted by an external body (e.g. Edexcel). (i) The Academic Registrar, through the Collaborative Provision Committee, will establish a specialist panel or panels of assessors with appropriate experience and expertise to assess both the overall structure of the proposal and the associated institution. The panel will consist of members of staff of Swansea University and at least one representative of any professional body, if relevant, that may be involved. Where no such bodies are involved, an assessor independent of both Swansea University and the institution may if appropriate also be invited to serve on the Panel. The external assessor's role will be to ensure that Swansea University considers the proposal impartially; to bring to the dialogue a perspective perhaps different from that which might otherwise exist; and to ensure that standards associated with a proposal are generally comparable with those of similar programmes. [The external assessor might also be appointed as the external examiner for the programme.] Where appropriate, the Academic Registrar or designate will arrange a visit by the panel of assessors to the prospective partner institution. This will be for the purpose of assessing at first hand the institution's academic and administrative infrastructures, its academic and professional achievements and aspirations, and the quality of its teaching or research supervisory staff. It will also assess the learning experience provided for students, the availability and use of resources (including teaching, accommodation, computing, laboratory, library and media and research facilities) and the institution's internal procedures for assuring quality. The visit will normally take place after the proposal has received initial approval by the Collaborative Provision Committee. The panel of assessors will report its conclusions and recommendations to the Collaborative Provision Committee. The recommendations will include the period of collaborative approval (up to and no more than five years) with provision for an interim review if desirable. It should be noted that the panel of assessors may also at this stage curtail a detailed proposal to the Standing Panel, Validation.

(ii)

(iii)

2.4.4 Joint Statement Memorandum of Agreement Following approval in principle of a collaborative proposal as noted above, a Memorandum of Agreement will be drawn up, to be agreed by Swansea University, the associated institution or organisation/s and, where appropriate, the statutory or professional body/bodies concerned. This statement will set out the responsibilities and duties of each of the partners in order to establish clear and mutual expectations of the collaborative partnership covering, among other things: (i) a definition of the means by which the academic standards of the programme are to be maintained and a clear statement/definition of responsibilities in terms of quality control and quality assurance; arrangements whereby, should the collaborative agreement be withdrawn or a programme terminated, students would be enabled to complete their studies later and obtain the qualification for which they had enrolled;
29

(ii)

Section 2

(iii)

arrangements for collaboration which are set out clearly and operate smoothly, ensuring that authority, accountability, executive action and communication are clearly defined; (iv) the allocation of responsibility for the oversight and maintenance of academic standards, and procedures for resolving any differences which might arise in respect of the programme between Swansea University and the associated institutions; (v) procedures and responsibilities for initial approval of the collaborative proposal and subsequent periodic review of the programme and monitoring of the associated institution/s; (vi) procedures and responsibilities in respect of programme management and monitoring, including specification of any ways in which those might be divided between Swansea University and the associated institution/organisation; (vii) assessment and examination arrangements; (viii) the consequences of breach of terms of the Memorandum of Agreement including the provision to enable any party to withdraw from the agreement; (ix) procedures for agreeing all necessary financial arrangements and the provision of resources, both physical and human; (this should include recording any fee waiver agreements) (x) responsibilities in respect of all administrative arrangements, such as student admission, enrolment, the location and general welfare of students, decisions relating to student progression and assessment; (xi) responsibilities and procedures to be followed in dealing with cases of unfair practice; Swansea University procedures relating to Unfair Practice should be applied, but the student cases will be heard at the partner academic institution/s; (xii) the period of notice for termination of the agreement; (normally, this will be twelve months); (xiii) an agreed minimum and maximum intake number of students; (xiv) where appropriate, arrangements for the approval of teaching staff on the collaborative programme; responsibility for the appointment and payment of external examiners; (xv) responsibility for awarding official statements and transcripts etc; (xvi) agreement on who should be responsible for advertising and recruitment; this may possibly lie with the associated institution/organisations; (xvii) in the case of 2+2 degree programme type arrangements, explicit agreement on the right or otherwise of students to progress on meeting clearly specified conditions to that element of the programme taught at Swansea University; (xviii) a clear statement of the rights or otherwise of students to access Swansea University facilities, including Library, welfare and careers services during the collaborative period. 2.5 MANAGEMENT OF COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS

2.5.1 Regular Reviews In addition to an interim review that may have been conducted by the home College, regular reviews of collaborative programmes will normally be conducted by Swansea University every five years or alternatively prior to the renewal of an agreement. The procedures adopted for the quinquennial review will be conducted by the Collaborative Provision Committee and will be similar to those outlined in the section of the Teaching Quality Manual in relation to periodic programme reviews.
30 Section 2

There will be additional issues relating to the nature of the collaborative partnership and this shall be reflected in the documentation, scope of questions and review team membership. Ordinarily, the panel will meet and discuss the programme with existing students on the programme and staff delivering the programme, and if possible with students who have completed the programme. Reports of these reviews will be submitted to the Collaborative Provision Committee and also to the relevant Academic Board. 2.5.2 Interim Revisions to Programmes of Study It is expected that, due to the dynamic nature of programmes of study, modifications will be made from time to time. Minor amendments may be agreed by the Head of the home College at Swansea University in consultation with the partner institution/organisation. Amendments to the assessment method must be made in consultation with the external examiner also. Major amendments must be approved by the relevant Academic Board and also reported to the Collaborative Provision Committee. All changes should be reported to the Academic Registrar who will record the amendments and advise the home College on whether formal committee approval must be sought. 2.5.3 Joint Board of Studies Following approval for the introduction of each collaborative programme, a home College will be identified. It will be deemed to be good practice to establish a Joint Board of Studies between the collaborating partners to oversee the programme which should meet annually. The Joint Board of Studies will normally consist of members of teaching, supervisory and possibly administrative staff from Swansea University and the collaborating partners. The main function of a Joint Board of Studies is to monitor the progress of the programme. Its terms of reference and duties will be: (i) to ensure that standards of the awarding institution are maintained and that quality assurance mechanisms are implemented, module review, programme monitoring and student feedback are undertaken; to approve amendments to the structure/syllabus/assessment of the programme or to refer such modifications to the home College Learning and Teaching Committee; to receive information regarding changes in programme staffing, teaching resources, physical resources etc. and make any recommendations to the bodies detailed below as a result of such changes; to receive and consider reports from Programme Co-ordinators concerning the development of the programme in question, which shall include statistical information as appropriate; to make nominations for the appointment of External Examiners and to receive the reports of External Examiners and (where appropriate) Moderators; to consider such matters as may from time to time be referred to the Joint Board of Studies by either the Academic Registrar or the associated institution's Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee;
31

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

(v)

(vi)

Section 2

(vii) (viii)

in conjunction with the Collaborative Provision Committee, to participate in the quinquennial review. The Joint Board of Studies may also raise any other relevant issues with the Swansea University Collaborative Provision Committee.

2.5.4 Administrative Procedures and Good Practice for the Management of Collaborative Programmes The following is endorsed as a statement of good practice for the management and administration of all collaborative agreements. Collaborative programmes should, as appropriate: recognise the autonomy of the associated academic institution/s, with particular reference to, among other things, academic policy and planning, programme development and financial matters; encourage and enable the associated academic institution/s to take maximum responsibility for assuring the quality of the programme; encompass peer review, drawing also upon available expertise of agencies, including industry, relevant professions, and the community.

The agreed administrative procedures associated with the introduction of collaborative programmes of study and those franchised by Swansea University are as follows: Pre-Requisites The standard of an award in the associated academic institution/s should be the same as that in Swansea University. There should not normally be any differentiation between the title of an award in an associated institution and Swansea University except where the programme content makes it appropriate to give a special designation within the title of the award. The academic structures adopted for the purpose by the partner institutions in the collaborative partnership should be such as to guarantee and enhance the academic and professional standards of the collaborative programmes. Copies of the collaborative agreements should be kept by Swansea University and the associated partners, in a centrally agreed format, together with a record of any subsequent amendments. The associated partners should ensure that their programme documentation is updated in the light of any agreed amendments. The associated partners should create and maintain in perpetuity a full record of the programmes of study taken by each of its candidates registered for an award of Swansea University, to enable the provision of transcripts of the studies undertaken to be provided on request. In the event that any associated academic partner should cease to operate, or otherwise cease its franchise relationship with Swansea University, suitable arrangements must be agreed with Swansea University so that the facility to provide such transcripts is not lost.

32

Section 2

Admissions Requirements Candidates must satisfy the requirements for admission to the proposed programme of study. Applications from industry/mature age students will be considered sympathetically and on an individual basis, and all applications for admission are made in conjunction with Swansea University Admissions Office. All publicity and advertising relating to collaborative programmes will indicate the involvement of all the participating institutions. Management Any Swansea University College involved in a collaborative programme of study must appoint a member of staff to co-ordinate the operation of the collaborative programme and make regular reports to the Collaborative Provision Committee. Similarly, a member of staff of the partner organisation or institution involved must be appointed to be responsible for the day-to-day management of the programme and to provide the link with the Swansea University home College and the Collaborative Provision Committee. Marketing Any advertising or publicity material must be approved by all collaborating parties before being made public. Also any programme literature e.g. handbooks, must be referred to the home College before publication. Programme Administration Each programme will be administered jointly by the approved academic/consortium staff of Swansea University and of the other participating institution/organisation. In the case of franchised programmes the Swansea University home College shall have overall academic responsibility for the programme with the teaching responsibility delegated to the participating institution/organisation. Assessment Procedures Assessment procedures will follow those agreed by the participating institutions/organisation. Where appropriate a mark/grade conversion table shall be adopted by the partners. The results of both undergraduate and postgraduate students pursuing collaborative programmes should be presented to the appropriate undergraduate or postgraduate University Award/Progression Board on an annual basis. Where appropriate a representative from Swansea University shall be present at any Examination Boards held at the partner institution/s, and it would be deemed to be good practice if the assessed work was double marked by Swansea University staff. Externality of academic opinion/professional opinion is important in all collaborative programmes. External examiners should be appointed by Swansea University, with the agreement of the associated institution/s, and they should submit to Swansea University, at appropriate times and at least annually, a report on the standard of the assessments and on the academic quality of the programme. Swansea University should ensure that it is familiar with any regulations imposed by statutory or professional bodies. In some cases this might extend to the joint appointment of external examiners.
Section 2 33

Swansea University should ensure that the reports of external examiners are made available promptly to the associated institution/s. Swansea University shall be responsible for responding to the examiner/s and, where appropriate, to any statutory or professional body/bodies on any recommendations. Quality Assurance The maintenance and oversight of academic standards will rest with the Senate of Swansea University through the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee. Swansea University should take steps to ensure that the associated academic institution/s has/have in place appropriate procedures for quality assurance and that rolling annual programme reviews are undertaken within the associated institution/s, with written records maintained. By agreement between the collaborative partners, it may be appropriate for the associated institution to submit to Swansea University by an agreed date a written annual report to assure it that the terms of the collaborative agreement have been met and, for example, that any issues raised by external examiners or by external inspection bodies have been addressed. Collaborative programmes of study should be subject to continuous monitoring and review by the associated institution/s through the home College in which they are offered; a regular rolling review will be an appropriate mechanism for this. Regular reporting to the Collaborative Provision Committee shall also take place, via the designated collaborative programme co-ordinator. In addition, regular reviews of partner institutions should be conducted by Swansea University; these might be undertaken at five-yearly intervals though in some cases an interim review might be desirable. This review process should also provide the partner institution/s with the opportunity to comment on the effectiveness of the collaborative partnership. It is desirable that the review should take full account of the views of the students within the collaborating institution/s. Student Enrolment All students pursuing a collaborative programme must enrol as students of Swansea University and may use the facilities of Swansea University as agreed. Students enrolled on a collaborative programme will, in certain circumstances, be entitled to apply for the appropriate financial assistance in accordance with the current governmental criteria. Students on appropriate programmes might also be required to enrol with the partner institution, and might also receive an award of that University. Unfair Practice Swansea University has regulations for dealing with allegations of unfair practice, both in formal written examinations and examinations conducted outside the examination room. These shall apply to all students on collaborative programmes. Cases of Unfair Practice shall be heard at the partner institution/s where the alleged unfair practice occurred.

34

Section 2

Disciplinary Action Where a student is discontinued on non-academic grounds by either/any institution, that student will cease to be a student of Swansea University. 2.6 INTRODUCING NEW AWARD NOMENCLATURE

2.6.1 Introduction Although the introduction of a new award nomenclature may be closely associated with the introduction of a new programme of study, consideration and approval of any such nomenclature should be considered through these procedures and separate from the procedures for the approval and validation of new programmes of study. A new programme of study, however, shall not be submitted for formal validation until the award nomenclature has been determined and approved, if necessary. Appendix 3 of this Manual has a complete list of the awards offered by Swansea University. The current portfolio of award nomenclature is broad and comprehensive and generally reflects national practice. It is expected that new programmes of study will generally lead to one of the existing awards, which are recognised by employers and well established within the higher education sector. Requests to introduce new award nomenclatures will therefore be considered as exceptional requests and strong arguments must be presented to the approval committees. Of paramount importance will be the employability of students, with particular relevance to the national and international recognition of the award by employers, not only in the short-term, but more importantly, its long-term recognition and sustainability. The principle of avoiding the adoption of nomenclature which describes a particular discipline, unless driven by professional bodies, has been adopted by the University. All new award nomenclature approved through these procedures shall be awards of Swansea University.

2.6.2 Procedure for Approving New Award Nomenclature Stage 1 - Preparation of a Proposal In preparing a proposal for the introduction of a new award nomenclature, the following areas should be addressed: the full title of the nomenclature to be introduced including a Welsh translation and abbreviation to be provided a fully argued reason as to why one of the award nomenclature already offered by the University is not appropriate and why the proposed nomenclature is more appropriate the rationale behind the need to introduce the new nomenclature with reference to:
o o o the College Business Plan the Credit and Qualifications Framework for Wales the standing of the award within the national and international HE sectors
35

Section 2

o o o o o o

the professional body (if relevant) recognition by potential employers long-term sustainability of the award the academic regulations applicable to the award recruitment and market demands possible impact of the award nomenclature not being approved

Stage 2 Consideration of the Proposal A proposal for the introduction of a new award nomenclature should be considered by a College Learning and Teaching Committee, in the first instance. A College should consider the academic validity of the new award and consider the new initiative within the context of the areas of development identified in the approved College Business Plan. It should also consider comments from External Examiners and professional bodies, if relevant. Stage 3 Consideration by Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee Following approval by the College, the proposal should be submitted to Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee for consideration. Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee should consider the academic validity of the award within the context of higher education in the UK and abroad. The Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee may also make reference to the Universitys strategic plan. Stage 4 Senate Approval Following endorsement by Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee, the award nomenclature should be referred to Senate for approval. Action following approval Following consideration and approval of a new award nomenclature through these procedures, the areas within the University below should be informed and systems updated accordingly: 2.7 the relevant College and Marketing and Admissions (for information) ; Student Records Unit to update the SITS system and tables which provide data to the Awards Management System; and the Academic Registry to update Appendix 3 of this Quality Manual. GUIDELINES ON PLACEMENT LEARNING

2.7.1 Introduction/Background Colleges must assure themselves of the quality of all placements to ensure that all students receive appropriate academic experience set in the context of stated learning outcomes for the placement. These guidelines are designed to assist members of staff in dealing with issues relating to Placement Learning by identifying minimum guidelines for Colleges.
36 Section 2

The Guidelines relate to any periods of study/work away from Swansea that form part of or which contribute to the award of credit on a modular programme or taught programme of study pursued at Swansea University. It is recognised that placements encompass a wide range of activities (such as a year abroad, study in lieu, industrial or professional placement) with a variety of learning outcomes and assessment processes. Therefore, the guidelines are broadly based and attempt to identify minimum requirements for all Colleges. 2.7.2 General principles, Responsibilities, Learning Outcomes and Assessment Irrespective of what form placement learning takes, Colleges should consider the contribution that placement learning makes to the overall aims of the programme and the specific learning outcomes. College As a minimum requirement Colleges should complete a personalised learning / training contract for each student which should include a statement of the aims and objectives of the placement; (Web link 6a in Appendix 14). clearly define their responsibilities for placement learning and identify the contribution that placement learning makes to the overall aims of the programme in the programme proposal documentation; identify the intended placement learning outcomes in the programme specification; identify personal development opportunities; ensure, where appropriate, that the learning content accommodates national subject benchmarking statements and the requirements of any accrediting Professional and Statutory bodies; ensure that placement learning is part of a coherent assessment strategy; ensure students are informed of these via the programme specification, assessment guidelines and placement information/handbooks (see appendix under Web Link 6b, Appendix 14) where placements are associated with the awarding of credit, the College should ensure that an internal College Examining Board considers the performance of each student in accordance with Swansea University assessment regulations; ensure that students are informed of the options available should they fail to satisfactorily complete a placement.

University The University should assist Colleges by providing advice and guidance on drafting programme specifications for placement learning through the Quality Office, Academic Registry; provide a Placement Learning Handbook template (A template is found under Web Link 6b, Appendix 14).
37

Section 2

Student The students should familiarise themselves with the aims, outcomes and assessment strategy associated with placement learning sign the learning/training contract before beginning the placement (web link 6a in Appendix 14)

2.7.3 Institutional Policies and Procedures The University is required to have in place policies and procedures which ensure that responsibilities for placement learning are met and that learning outcomes are appropriate. College As a minimum requirement Colleges should ensure that an appropriate member of academic staff (Head of College or his/her nominee) approves all placements; consider the health and safety requirements of the placement and if applicable the requirements of professional and funding bodies; ensure procedures are in place to accurately report and deal with accidents and untoward incidents should they occur during the placement; where necessary ensure that appropriate insurance cover is in place; have in place procedures for dealing with students who failed to satisfactorily complete their placement learning. These should be clearly conveyed in the placement handbook/information pack; have in place procedures approved by the appropriate Academic Board for managing exemptions from placements which otherwise are required for the successful completion of the programme of study; where necessary ensure that appropriate educational audit procedures are in place to meet the requirements of professional and funding bodies.

Student Ensure mechanisms are in place that meet their requirements for learning.

2.7.4 Institutional Responsibilities College As a minimum requirement Colleges should inform work placement providers, in writing, of their responsibilities, this should include their responsibilities with regard to learning opportunities, assessment and the health and safety of students in their care It would be left to the discretion of the College how this was done. More detailed documentation concerning the specific details of the placement are recommended in the form of a work placement contract or training agreement (web link 6a Appendix 14.)
Section 2

38

The College is obliged to ensure that all agreements are completed in full with appropriate signatures from student and placement provider.

Where visits by the academic tutor to the placement occur, the tutor has a duty to observe the health and safety practices in the placement and to feedback information to the College and where necessary take appropriate action. University The University will provide Colleges with a draft work placement training agreement template which Colleges may amend/adopt accordingly (Web link 6c Appendix 14). 2.7.5 Students Responsibilities and Rights The University has a duty to ensure that all students undertaking a placement are made aware of their responsibilities and rights.

College As a minimum requirement Colleges should outline students' rights and responsibilities in the handbook/information pack. These should include: (i) Responsibilities as representatives of the institution; towards the placement provider; for managing their learning and professional relationships; for recording progress and achievements; for alerting the placement provider and institution to any problems which might prevent satisfactory completion of the placement. Rights to a safe placement; to be treated in accordance with applicable legislation; to an appropriate learning experience.

(ii) University

The University will produce guidelines for Colleges suggesting information, which should be given to students in the handbook/information packs (see weblink 6b, Appendix 14). Student students should familiarise themselves with their rights and responsibilities; students should familiarise themselves with the rules and regulations associated with their placement; students have the right to appropriate fulfilment of learning objectives; students should inform their Colleges of any health/disability requirements;

Section 2

39

Students have the same health and safety responsibilities as any other employee in the workplace when undertaking approved placements. Reasonable care must be taken towards their own safety and that of others who may be affected by their actions.

2.7.6 Student Support and Information All students undertaking a placement should receive appropriate guidance and support in preparation for, during and after their placements. College As a minimum requirement Colleges should ensure all students are prepared for their placement through the dissemination of information and advice including reference to objectives and learning outcomes, for example, through a briefing/induction session prior to their placement. Where appropriate the experiences and comments of past cohorts should be incorporated into this information; ensure students familiarise themselves with legal, cultural and language differences; ensure where the placement is in a non-English speaking country students meet a declared level of proficiency in the language; provide students with appropriate guidance; this could be done via handbooks, information packs or via the internet; inform students that they must remain in regular contact with their College and take steps to ensure that the progress of students is monitored throughout the period of study; ensure that students contact their College at least once per semester; Some Colleges may require more regular contact; ensure that each student is provided with a named contact, in the placement and home University, who will act as a first point of communication; ensure that students receive adequate induction into the placement from the placement provider; provide a reorientation session on completion of the placement; ensure that any occupational health/disability requirements are supported prior to, during and after the placement; in the event of exceptional circumstances/emergency the College should deal with incidents in accordance with normal procedures.

Note: in the case of the Erasmus programme, students must select, and receive approval from both the sending and receiving institutions for their choice of programmes as part of a formal learning agreement (see Web Link 7, Appendix 14, for a sample learning agreement). Student students should avail themselves of the induction events and information provided by the College; students should ensure that they keep in regular contact with their College either through e-mail or other means of communication.
Section 2

40

2.7.7 Staff Development The University is responsible for ensuring that all staff involved in placement learning are competent to fulfil their role College As a minimum requirement Colleges should include a question on the student/placement feedback form on the organisation/preparation given by the College for the placement; coordinators should familiarise themselves with the aims and outcomes of the programme.

University the University should provide appropriate training for Placement Coordinators; the University should encourage staff to avail themselves of external networks/resources, for example Placenet (http://www.placenet.org.uk/).

Student Students should provide feedback through the evaluation questionnaire.

2.7.8 Complaints The University has a responsibility to ensure that procedures are in place for dealing with complaints. College As a minimum requirement Colleges should inform students that all complaints would be investigated and responded to and that a formal record of the complaint and follow up action would be kept in line with the complaints procedure.

University the University should provide clear advice on complaints in the Academic Guide.

Student students should familiarise themselves with the complaints procedures, contained in the Academic Guide.

2.7.9 Monitoring and Evaluation of Placement Learning Opportunities The University is responsible for monitoring and reviewing the effectiveness of policies and procedures associated with placement learning.
Section 2 41

College As a minimum requirement Colleges should have in place procedures for feedback from students and the placement provider, for example a questionnaire; review the effectiveness of placements through module/programme review (see Sections 5.2 and 6.2 of this Manual).

University The University should review the monitoring and effectiveness of student placement through the system of annual review, enhancement reviews or where required ad-hoc audit.

Student Students should complete feedback/evaluation forms.

42

Section 2

SECTION 3: MODIFYING AND CONCLUDING PROGRAMMES OF STUDY

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Section 2 of this Manual outlines those procedures for introducing a programme of study, and Sections 5 and 6 specifies the obligations of the College in ongoing monitoring and periodic review of the programme. To ensure that the quality and standards of the programme are maintained and that the interests of the students are protected, Section 3.2 specify the procedures to be followed in modifying a programme, including where programmes are to be amended to include a period of study/work abroad or in industry. Section 3.3 states the procedures for withdrawing or suspending a programme. Should a programme transfer administrative responsibilities between Colleges, see section 3.4. Section 3.5 provides the procedures for introducing and modifying modules. The QAAs Code of Practice (Section 7: Programme Design, Approval, Monitoring and Review, Section 10: Recruitment and Admissions) and its policy on Programme Specifications are applicable to the policies and procedures outlined in this section of the Manual. 3.2 PROCEDURES FOR MAKING CHANGES TO PROGRAMMES OF STUDY

3.2.1 General Principles related to the Admission of Students In order to avoid disadvantaging applicants, major changes to a programme are not normally permitted once the application cycle has commenced. (Major changes are defined in the Guidelines in section 3.2.3). The application cycle is one year in duration. In those cases where such changes are deemed unavoidable/appropriate the Head of College shall seek approval from the relevant Dean of Academic Board. If the change is authorised, the Administrative Officer, Academic Registry shall inform the Admissions Officer who shall, in turn, advise the applicants affected. 3.2.2 Specific procedures Specifications 1. for making amendments to Programme

Upon final approval of a new programme of study, the programme specification section will appear in the Programme Maintenance database. Electronic copies of specifications for existing programmes shall also continue to be stored within the Programme Maintenance database. These documents shall be stored for audit purposes and to form a point of reference for future reviews. The centrally stored programme specification shall be the definitive source of information describing the programme structure. Information in the current programme specification shall inform the modules which are optional, those which are core/compulsory (and at what level of study) and this material shall be used to generate the online Catalogue of Modules. Colleges should then use this 'reference document' as the basis for student handbooks, promotional

2.

Section 3

43

material, the prospectus etc., but it must be acknowledged that the centrally stored version shall be the accurate one. 3. In accordance with the QAAs Handbook for Institutional Review: Wales (2009), programme specifications are key pieces of qualitative information which institutions are required to make available for students, employers, staff etc. As a consequence, the centrally stored, electronic versions of programme specifications shall be made publicly available, with the appropriate disclaimer concerning annual modifications to modules being permitted. When the central system is fully operational, Colleges must remove all versions of specifications on their own websites and only refer to the central source to avoid both confusion and possible student complaint. Student literature should also be updated. Colleges will be able to modify the aims, intended outcomes and narrative describing teaching, learning and assessment methods for programmes by updating the central electronic document. The list of modules offered for the programme, including designations of core/compulsory modules may also be modified annually. These changes will not require the approval of the Dean, but they will only be permitted at designated times during the session/calendar year to ensure that currently enrolled students in that particular year of study are not affected. The designated times will be dependant upon which time of the year the Colleges initiate procedures to monitor the programme and comprising modules for which they act as Home College. See section 3.2.3 regarding the elements which the College is able to modify without approval. Only nominated staff in the Home College would make these modifications to the programme specification. Staff who require access should contact the Academic Registry for assistance. It is expected that where Colleges are proposing substantial changes to the programme specification 1, that a document outlining the rationale for the change, including the opinion of an external assessor 2 and an updated specification is submitted for internal approval by the relevant Dean and, where necessary referred to the Standing Panel, Validation for further scrutiny. Programme Specifications are required for all programmes of study that lead to the award of the University of Wales or Swansea University, including joint honours, programmes involving study/work placement, taught postgraduate programmes and programmes offered by collaborative partners. It shall be the responsibility of the Home College to develop the specification and liaise with the other subject(s) regarding the intended outcomes of the programme, in particular the features which integrate the two subjects and the modular choices available before any changes were made. Such changes shall be the responsibility of the Home Colleges representative (see points 4 and 5 above).

4.

5.

6.

7.

See section 3.2.3 for which changes require approval. In accordance with the QAAs Code of Practice (section 4) and Swansea University Regulations for External Examining (Section 4.10 of this Manual), the external assessor may be the current external examiner for the programme but care should be taken to ensure that this involvement does not conflict with the main role of the examiner which is to assure standards. 44 Section 3
2

8.

Each session, the current programme specification (aims, outcomes and modular structure) will be saved electronically by Student Records. Nominated representatives will then be able to update the specification for the incoming cohort of students. These electronic versions are retained indefinitely as they are used to generate the diploma supplement for students completing their programme of study. Monitoring and reporting on annual changes is considered unnecessary and overly bureaucratic. Instead it is proposed that the Academic Boards monitor changes through a process of periodic review reports. Where there are major changes prior to any scheduled periodic review, Colleges must submit an amended programme specification, along with the rationale/background for the change to the Dean for approval. Where necessary, re-validations will be organised.

9.

3.2.3 Procedures for Making Administrative Changes to Programmes All amendments to programmes MUST be considered by and approved by the relevant College Committees with appropriate minutes and supporting documentation available at College level. The Table on the following page summarises the changes. Key to Categories in the Table - Changes to Programmes Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 require approval by a Standing Panel of the Academic Board and will be reported to the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee; require approval by the relevant Academic Board and will be reported to the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee need to be reported to Academic Board only; may be acted upon by the College and do NOT require approval by Academic Board.

Notes: Changes to programme aims, learning outcomes and designation of core/compulsory modules will only be permitted at specified times in the academic year and will normally only come into effect for future, not current academic years. Once approved by the relevant body, the College shall update the relevant student documentation for future academic years and advise other Colleges involved in the programmes delivery, where appropriate. It is the Colleges responsibility to ensure that the centrally stored programme specification is updated through the programme maintenance screens prior to the start of the academic year in which the changes are expected to come into effect. Once approved by the relevant University Committee, the Academic Registry will be responsible for advising other administrative departments of the changes (e.g. Admissions Office, Marketing, and Student Records Unit). Changes to programmes involving Academic Board approval will be reported to the Regulations, Standards and Quality Committee.

Section 3

45

Major Changes Academic Board authority New programme with a new title (including where modules already exist on other approved programmes). Upgrading to a higher level (e.g. upgrading of a Cert HE, Dip HE, Foundation Degree or Ordinary Degree to Honours level or upgrading of PgCert or PgDip to Masters level. Existing programme is being changed by more than 75% as a result of the introduction of new modules/changes to modules. Adding study abroad or a year in Industry to an existing programme. Existing programme is being changed by between 25-75% as a result of the introduction of new modules or changes to modules. Introduction of a new mode of study to an existing programme (e.g. distance learning)

Category from above list

Documentation required

Electronic proposal for a new programme of study.

Electronic proposal for a new programme of study.

Other relevant sections of the Teaching Quality Manual (See Section 2.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual, and the booklet Approving New Programmes of Study.) (See Section 2.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual, and the booklet Approving New Programmes of Study.)

Any change of title, irrespective of whether the programme content is being changed (including changes of title of lower level awards). Withdrawal of a programme

Updated programme specification with memo/report outlining rationale for the change. External input into the change is probably required. Fully completed Proforma for adding an additional year. Updated programme specification with memo/report outlining rationale for the change. A validation event may be necessary Memo outlining the change, rationale, implications for timetabling, pastoral/academic support structures, timetable for implementation and provision of print/electronic materials. Memo advising of new title(s) and brief rationale for change. Reported to RSQC and admin departments

See Section 3.2.2 and 6.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual.

See Web Link 8, Appendix 14 See Section 3.2.2 and 6.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual.

Suspension of a programme

Memo advising of which session this comes into effect. Management Plan may be necessary. Memo advising of which session this comes into effect. Management Plan may be necessary.

Section 3.3 of the Teaching Quality Manual. Section 3.3 of the Teaching Quality Manual.

46

Section 3

Minor Changes College authority

Category from above list

Documentation required

Other relevant sections of the Teaching Quality Manual

Introduction of a new part-time or full-time mode of study to an existing validated programme. Changes to aims, learning outcomes, teaching and learning methods.

Memo outlining the change, rationale, any implications for timetabling, pastoral/academic support structures. Updated on-line programme specification.

Section 3.2.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual: Note: substantial changes may require revalidation in line with the periodic review procedures (Section 6.2).

Changes to the designation of core/compulsory modules.

Existing programme is being changed by less than 25% as a result of the introduction of new modules or changes to modules.

Updated on-line programme specification, module catalogue. Communication with Colleges Updated programme specification.

See Section 3.2.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual.

Section 3

47

3.3 PROCEDURES FOR PROGRAMMES WHICH ARE TO BE DISCONTINUED OR SUSPENDED The University is obliged to ensure that its section of the national database, maintained by the Student Loan Company, which lists available programmes is current and that its internal Student Record System listing available programmes is also correct. The Admissions and Publications Office must also be advised so that it can update recruitment material. Faculties are responsible for the quality and standards of the academic provision. Consequently, all these parties must be informed of a decision to discontinue or suspend a programme of study. The Academic Board will have the actual authority to withdraw or suspend a programme of study so that strategic cross-institutional issues are taken into consideration before the programme is removed from the Universitys academic portfolio. Decisions of Colleges to withdraw or suspend a programme are consequently only recommendations to the University and not a final authorised decision. In order to avoid disadvantaging applicants, the withdrawal or suspension of a programme is not normally permitted once the application cycle has commenced and, if permitted, no later than four months preceding the next student enrolment. In those cases where the withdrawal or suspension of a programme is deemed unavoidable, the Head of College shall seek approval from the relevant Dean. If the change is authorised by the Dean, the Administrative Officer, Academic Registry shall inform the Admissions Officer who shall, in turn, advise the applicants affected. The College should advise both the Admissions Office and Academic Registry at an early stage of decisions to suspend/withdraw a programme. Consideration should be made of both taught and research students if an entire subject area is to be withdrawn. 3.3.1 Where there are no students currently enrolled on a Programme/ no applications Where a programme has no active student enrolments or applications, and the College recommends discontinuation/suspension of a programme, the Head of College must inform the Academic Board(s) of this recommendation, highlighting any resource or academic implications that may arise. The Academic Registry will ensure that any implications of this recommendation, including the impact that it might have on any joint or combined honours students in other Colleges, have been addressed Following consideration by the Academic Registry, it is then the responsibility of the Academic Registry to seek approval from the Academic Board(s) which will take into account any strategic issues. After consideration (and presumed approval) by the Academic Board, the Academic Registry shall inform the relevant parties (Admissions Office, Publications Office, Student Loan Company, Student Records Unit, external examiners) that the programme will no longer be offered and from which academic session. The Academic Board shall normally only decline the Colleges recommendation to withdraw or suspend a programme under exceptional circumstances, where it is felt that the programme contributes significantly to fulfilling the strategic objectives of the institution. Where this occurs and Colleges are dissatisfied with this, there shall be leave to appeal to the Universitys Management Board.
48 Section 3

3.3.2 Where students are currently enrolled on or have applied to a Programme The University has an obligation to ensure that the interests of students remaining on a programme which is to be discontinued or suspended are safeguarded and to ensure that arrangements are made which provide the opportunity for the students to complete the programme on which they are registered. Applicants who have been provided with offers of places for programmes which are to be suspended should also be advised of appropriate routes for transfer within or outside of the University. The College must promptly inform the Academic Registry of the session to which no further students will be admitted (or when the suspension of the programme will come into effect). It is then the responsibility of the Academic Registry to pass this information to the Academic Board for consideration, which shall consider for example the impact that it might have on any joint or combined honours students in other Colleges. Following consideration by the Academic Board, it is then the responsibility of the Academic Registry to inform the relevant parties (Admissions Office, Publications Office, Student Records Unit, external examiners) that the programme will no longer be offered/suspended and from which academic session so that the University on-line prospectus is up-to-date. The Academic Board shall normally only decline the Colleges recommendation to withdraw or suspend a programme under exceptional circumstances, where it is felt that the programme contributes significantly to fulfilling the strategic objectives of the institution. Where this occurs and Colleges are dissatisfied with this, there shall be leave to appeal to the Universitys Management Board. Students remaining on such programmes should be informed as soon as possible, in a letter from the Head of College, or his/her nominee, that the programme is being discontinued/suspended. In the letter, students should be reassured about the Universitys continuing commitment to the programme as long as students remain enrolled on it and that they will receive the qualification for which they are registered if they fulfil all the requirements. If necessary a meeting with the students shall be held. The Head of College, in consultation with the programme coordinator, should draw up a management plan to cover the period during which the programme is winding down. The plan should include: arrangements in place for delivering the programme to the remaining students, including safeguarding the routes through the programme identified in the College or Programme Handbook, as appropriate; arrangements in place for communicating with and advising students which have approved applications to the programme; mechanisms in place for continuing to support students through the remainder of the programme (e.g. arrangements for personal tutors); arrangements for the maintenance of student records and files for ensuring the continuing availability of references for students; arrangements for consulting and informing students about the future management of the programme; The means by which the College will ensure the maintenance of academic standards in assessment and examination for what may be a small group of students.
49

Section 3

(If research students are affected, relevant matters such as supervisors, resources, training provision will also have to be taken into account).

External Examiners for the programme must continue to be appointed until the final cohort has completed the programme. The External Examiners must be advised of the decision to withdraw or suspend the programme and it would be good practice to provide him/her with the Management Plan where applicable. Regular quality assurance is to be undertaken, including annual monitoring of the programme (AMMP) and responding to recommendations from external examiners. The Academic Board will monitor the implementation of the Management Plan and close scrutiny will be paid to issues such as external examiners reports and AMMP submissions. 3.3.3 Role of the Senior Management Where the decision to withdraw or suspend a programme has been taken by the senior management of the University, and not by the College, the above actions of informing students and development of a managed withdrawal plan shall be implemented, but may be overseen by the relevant Dean rather than the Head of College concerned. The process is summarised in the diagram in Appendix 4.

3.4

CHANGES IN PROGRAMME ADMINISTRATION

Occasionally the University/Colleges might change the allocation of subject areas to a Home College. In these cases, the new Home College should be aware of the administrative responsibilities in the delivery of the programme and obligations to students as outlined in Section 7 of this Manual as well as the ongoing need for quality assurance to be undertaken and standards maintained. 3.4.1 Responsibility of Colleges The key priority is to continue to deliver a high quality student experience. Therefore the recipient Home College is reminded about:
50

The need to communicate with existing, returning and incoming students about the change in designation and issues relating to their administrative home; Provision of space on notice boards, student pigeon-holes etc; Ensuring that personal tutors are established/supervisors appointed for taught postgraduate students; Ensuring that such students are included in representation on the staff-student consultative committee; The provision of a student handbook and appropriate induction to ensure that students are fully aware of any differences in details, e.g. assessment deadlines, late penalty procedures, etc; The arrangements for the transfer of student records and files between Colleges for ensuring the continuing availability of references for students, where staff in the original delivery College are still employed at the University; Ensuring that marketing information, including the University prospectus and its own material, including the web is updated.
Section 3

The College originally delivering the programme is responsible for providing documentation to the new Home College concerning: The prior Student Handbook, module outlines etc; Responses to prior external examiners reports; Prior module reviews and annual monitoring reports (AMMP); Any prior programme review documentation; Information on current external examiners appointed (there can be liaison with the Academic Registry on this matter). This College is also responsible for informing the Academic Registry concerning a change in designation of Home College so that this information can be conveyed to the following parties: Academic Board for information; Quality Office for external examiner administration; Student Records for re-assignment of programmes to the correct Home College and also the web; Publications section, Marketing.

The new Home College is responsible for: Establishing a Board of Studies which comprises all staff teaching on the programme, plus other relevant personnel see the Terms of Reference for Subject Boards of Studies on the Intranet; Coordinating a response to external examiners reports, including sharing of the report with members of the teaching team outside the College; Coordinating the submission of an annual monitoring of modules and programmes report as well as, where appropriate, responses to the National Student Survey/Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey or other internal surveys of student opinion conducted by the university; Liaising with the external examiner; Establishment of examination boards in accordance with university regulations; Other ongoing quality assurance activities as outlined in the Teaching Quality Manual.

It is the responsibility of the new Home College to coordinate said response to external examiners reports and AMMP, regardless of when the change in designation of Home College occurs.

3.5

PROCEDURES FOR APPROVING AND CHANGING MODULES

A module is a discrete educational component of a programme of study which has aims, learning outcomes, a syllabus, reading list and teaching, learning and assessment methods. (A full definition of a module may be found in the Academic Guide.) 3.5.1 Approving New Modules Colleges are responsible for developing the content of a module and must complete the electronic module proforma summarising the module details (see Web Link 9, Appendix
Section 3 51

14, for a copy of the module pro-forma). Relevant university guidance on contact hours (section 3.6, following) and assessment tariff (section 3.7) should be taken into account in the development of the module. Colleges should ensure that the scheduling of new modules, in particular core and compulsory modules do not clash with existing modules offered within the programme(s) and should liaise accordingly with the Universitys Timetabling Officer. A new module may not be introduced until the relevant College Learning and Teaching Committee has reviewed and approved the details of the module pro-forma. The College Learning and Teaching Committee seek assurances that: all sections of the proforma have been completed; the intended learning outcomes are clearly articulated and are appropriate to the level of the module; the credit weighting of the module is consistent with the expected student workload; the guidelines on contact hours and assessment tariff have been applied; the assessment method(s) outlined will be able to determine whether the intended outcomes have been achieved; Anticipatory action has been taken to ensure that, in addition to any reasonable adjustments that may be offered, disabled students are not disadvantaged in accessing the curriculum. It is not sufficient to indicate that advice from the Disability Office shall be sought as issues arise, Colleges will increasingly be expected to demonstrate how anticipatory action is applied to the modules and programmes on offer; the Universitys Collaborative Provision Committee has considered any collaborative/industry-based aspects The Welsh Development Officer in the Academic Registry has been notified if any part of the module is to be delivered through the medium of Welsh.

Where queries arise, the College Learning and Teaching Committee may refer the module pro-forma to the proposed module leader concerned for amendments. Before a module can be introduced the pro-forma must be approved by the College Learning and Teaching Committee. Once approved, the module details are recorded on the Student Record System, the module is timetabled, and teaching rooms are arranged. Guidance notes on writing learning outcomes and in outlining the reasonable adjustments that should be made for students with disabilities are included at the end of the online proforma (Web Link 9, Appendix 14), but should be deleted upon submission of the completed module proforma.

The level of the module shall be consistent with level descriptors found in the document Higher Education in Wales: Credit Specification and Guidance (2004). 52 Section 3

3.5.2 Changing Module Details Once approved, the details of modules available during a session are accessible via the Universitys Intranet. On an annual basis, Colleges are responsible for validating that the module data are correct, and may alter module descriptions. Colleges may also amend the title of a module provided that the change does not reflect a substantial change to the module content. This data is then used to create the on-line catalogue, for timetabling purposes and for funding. The College LTC must approve the following changes: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) changes to the level of the module changes to the credit weighting substantial changes to the method of teaching or assessment substantial changes to the method of delivery (e.g. from campus-based to distance learning)

The changes should be made via a memo to the College LTC with an accompanying rationale for the change and identifying implications of changes, e.g. if the level increases, what is the corresponding impact on the syllabus/assessment requirement. The Colleges Learning and Teaching Committee may change the title or code of the module (in liaison with Student Records) and make minor amendments to the percentage split between methods of assessment. Colleges may also change whether modules are compulsory for certain programmes, but should be aware of the implications this may have to the programme structure and liaise with the relevant College concerning joint programmes (see Section 3.2.2 for the policy on amending programme specifications and also Section 3.2.3 on making other administrative changes). It would be advisable for such changes to be reported to the College LTC. Student Records and Colleges involved in delivering joint or combined honours programmes should be advised of these changes so that student handbooks can be updated accordingly. The College LTC must maintain accurate minutes showing module approvals and amendments that have been considered. Changes that arise following module review Colleges must undertake annual module review to assure the effectiveness and suitability of learning, teaching and assessment approaches (see Section 5.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual). Review activity may take place after the last formal meetings of the session for the College Learning and Teaching Committee and also after the deadline for annual module maintenance. When this occurs and where major amendments are deemed necessary, Colleges would delegate executive approval to the Chair of the College LTC, providing the necessary

The level of the module shall be consistent with level descriptors found in the document Higher Education in Wales: Credit Specification and Guidance (2004). 53

Section 3

paperwork and rationale for the change, including any implications that may occur to programme structure (in particular where credit volume of the module has altered). Colleges are required to inform students who have pre-selected the module of the approved changes. Colleges must also advise other Colleges which might be affected by these changes, e.g. joint honours programmes in particular. 3.6 GUIDELINES ON CONTACT HOURS

These are guidelines in the development of a teaching structure for the modules delivery and in completion of the University module proforma. (Note: all except the composite module are based on 10 credit point modules) 3.6.1 Lecture-Based Modules Staff-led contact* Reading/Private Study Preparation for assessment Total Notional Hours 3.6.2 Intensive Private Study Modules Staff-led contact* Reading/Private Study Preparation for assessment Total Notional Hours 15 hours 60 hours 25 hours 100 20 hours 50 hours 30 hours 100

3.6.3 Practical-Based Module (10 credit points) Staff-led contact* Reading/Private Study Preparation for assessment Total Notional Hours 3.6.4 Project-Based Module/Dissertation Staff-led contact Private Study and assessment preparation Total Notional Hours 5 hours (minimum) 95 hours 100 50 hours 20 hours 30 hours 100

54

Section 3

3.6.5 Work Based Learning Staff led contact Private study Prep for assessment Total Notional Hours 20 50 30 100

3.6.6 Enquiry Based Learning Staff-led contact Private Study and Preparation for assessment Total Notional Hours 10 hours (minimum) 70 20 hours 100

3.6.7 Example Composite Module - 20 credit points (Practical 50% and Lecture Based 50%) Staff-led contact* Reading/Private Study Preparation for assessment Total Notional Hours * 70 hours 70 hours 60 hours 200

denotes a permitted variation of +/-25% regarding staff-led contact hours. Any variations would result in corresponding decreases/increases in the amount of time for private study/assessment preparation.

3.6.8 Contact hours and Level of Study It is recognised that modules at lower levels of study (i.e. levels 0 and 1) might have a higher number of contact hours than those for levels 2, 3 and M. 3.6.9 Variations from the main teaching methods Modules which use alternate teaching methods e.g. distance learning modules, etc. will not conform to the main teaching methods outlined above, but should use these as building blocks for the establishment of appropriate contact hours. 3.6.10 Professional Body Requirements It is recognised that professional body requirements may require that mandatory training in professional programmes exceed the stated requirements for contact hours. Guidance updated and approved by the Learning and Teaching Committee June 2010

Section 3

55

3.7

ASSESSMENT TARIFF GUIDELINES

The assessment tariff is intended as a guide for congruent assessment across the institution. The intention is to ensure some consistency of assessment load between colleges in the interests of students and academics. It is expected that colleges will interpret the tariff according to the assessment requirements of their discipline. Whilst none of the above is prescriptive, internal examiners should pay regard to the overall spirit and purpose when proposing alternative assessment for College consideration. Colleges are encouraged to use a range of assessments appropriate to level and discipline and it is recommended that Colleges use formative assessment alongside summative assessment. Creative assessment will include a range of alternative components identified by Colleges as appropriate to their subject areas, these may include class tests, presentations. All forms of assessment should be approved through the College quality process. Feedback shall be given on all forms of assessment. This can be given to individuals or groups/cohorts in verbal, written or electronic format. Feed forward is as important for formative as summative assessment. 10 credits Coursework Class tests examinations* 1-2 hours and Other components As specified in College Assessment Policy

100%

2000-2500 words

75%

1500-2000 words

1+ hour

Pro rata

50% 25% Feedback/ forward

1000-1500 words 500-750 words Individual written/verbal

1 hour - 1 hour

Pro rata Pro rata

and Cohort or Group or As appropriate individual

* It should be noted that formal examinations should be a minimum of 1 hours in length for a 10 credit module, 2 hours for 20 credits and 3 hours for 30 credits

The table above sets out guidelines on normal assessment requirements for a 10 credit module. The table applies to all levels and should be interpreted on a pro rata basis according to module credit weighting

56

Section 3

SECTION 4: ASSESSMENT AND AWARD OF QUALIFICATIONS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The Universitys Assessment Policy which was approved in 2009 for implementation in the 2010-11 session can be found here (http://www.swan.ac.uk/registry/AZGuide/A/AssessmentPolicy/). Further details on a range of related assessment subjects can be found in sections 4.3 to 4.11 of this Manual. Section 4.3 concerns feedback on examinations, 4.4 concerns the format of submission of assessed work, section 4.5 the policy on retention of assessed work and section 4.6 a statement on the use and interpretation of TurnItIn software and its outputs. Section 4.7 outlines the University's policy on anonymous marking which provides one means of ensuring that assessment practices are fair, reliable and accurate. Section 4.8 contains the Universitys policy on double marking. In section 4.9, there is the policy on illegible examination scripts. Section 4.10 contains guidelines on work which has been submitted in Welsh (but where the tuition has been in English). A statement concerning making adjustments to the assessment process in extenuating circumstances is found in section 4.11. The assessment policy is supplemented by Guidance Notes for College Examination Officers (available from the Academic Registry and on the Intranet), which provides more detailed guidelines on how the policy is implemented. College Handbooks are required to state College assessment policy, in relation to the general University policy and to refer to University assessment and progression regulations, along with programme-specific information such as required coursework and deadlines for its submission. External Examiners have an important role to play in promoting the quality of teaching and in ensuring academic standards. Section 4.12 outlines the procedures for the selection of external examiners and their roles and responsibilities in commenting on the fairness of assessment practices. (The process by which external examiners' reports are discussed may be found in Section 5.4.) The on-line Academic Guide, along with the document Undergraduate Assessment Regulations provides a comprehensive overview of the University's rules for assessment, including undergraduate pass marks, grading scales, progression, award of qualification and classification of honours degrees. Details of the timing of assessment and the Structure and Terms of Reference for Examination Boards are contained in Undergraduate Assessment Regulations. This document also includes Swansea University Guidelines for Colleges for dealing with students with extenuating circumstances and/or special needs which outlines what adjustments should be made in the assessment process. The document Assessment Regulations for Postgraduate Taught Awards contains the comparable information concerning the assessment of taught postgraduate programmes. The QAAs Code of Practice (Section 6: Assessment of Students, September 2006 and Section 4: External Examiners) are applicable to the policies and procedures outlined in this section of the Manual.
Section 4 57

4.2

UNIVERSITY ASSESSMENT POLICY

4.2.1 Introduction The Assessment Policy establishes principles of assessment to which the institution adheres and gives clear guidance for users. These act as a code of good practice for a range of assessment procedures for Undergraduate, Taught Masters and Research degrees, including collaborative programmes. It is designed to promote assessment which is fair, explicit and promotes student learning. The Policy is designed to be a key reference document for the Institution and has been informed by Section 6 of the Quality Assurance Agency Code of Practice for the Assessment of Students (September 2006). 4.2.2 What is assessment? Assessment describes any processes that evaluate the outcomes of student learning in terms of knowledge, understanding, skills, attitudes and abilities. It should:(i) (ii) (iii) Provide a means to enhance student learning - also referred to as Assessment for learning; Provide a means by which to judge and certify student achievements also referred to as Assessment of learning; Provide a means by which staff can evaluate the effectiveness of their teaching.

Any assessment can, and often does, involve more than one of these elements. Assessment can be both formative and summative. Formative assessment has a developmental purpose and is designed to help learners learn more effectively by giving them feedback on their performance and on how it can be improved/or maintained. Summative assessment is used to indicate the extent of a learners success in meeting the assessment criteria used to gauge the intended learning outcomes of a module or programme. 1

4.2.3 Principle of Assessment Assessment for Learning Principles a) Assessment practice should promote effective learning (QAA Principle 3) b) Appropriate and timely feedback is provided to students on assessed work in a way that promotes learning and facilitates improvements (QAA Principle 9).

Assessment Principles and Procedures c) The principles and procedures for, and processes of, assessment should be explicit, valid and reliable (QAA Principle 2)
Definitions from QAA Code of Practice, Section 6: Assessment of students September 2006 pp3536 58 Section 4
1

d) The amount and timing of assessment enables effective and appropriate evaluation of students achievement of intended learning outcomes (QAA Principle 6). e) The procedures for marking and for moderating marks must be transparent and fair (QAA Principle 7) f) The criteria for progressing from one stage of a programme to another and for qualifying for an award must be transparent (QAA Principle 8).

Conduct of Assessment g) Assessment should be conducted with rigour, probity and fairness and with due regard to security (QAA Principle 5). h) Assessment decisions must be documented accurately and systematically and decisions of relevant assessment panels and examination boards are to be communicated as quickly as possible (QAA Principle 15). i) Students should be fully aware of what constitutes academic misconduct and the consequences associated with it (QAA Principle 14). Each of the principles is structured in terms of the implementation, stating what is required in relation to the particular principle and further references/links/reading. See the full Assessment Policy for details (http://swan.ac.uk/registry/AZGuide/A/AssessmentPolicy/) and also examples of enhancement approaches on the SALT web-site (http://www.swan.ac.uk/university/StaffInformation/SwanseaAcademyofLearningand Teaching/) The remaining sections of this Manual elaborate further detailed guidance on how some of these principles are operationalised.

4.3

FEEDBACK ON EXAMINATIONS

The Universitys Learning and Teaching Committee has agreed that feedback will be provided to students on all examinations. Ideally students would receive such feedback individually, but this is often impractical due to large group sizes. Feedback could instead be generic. One option would be 'outline solutions'. An alternative is to summarise performance and to highlight some of the more common issues, strengths and weaknesses identified during marking. Feedback may take a variety of forms including individual face to face feedback, written comments or some form of generic feedback including common areas for improvement and an indication of the distribution of marks across the cohort. The provision of feedback on examinations will be monitored through the Regulation, Quality and Standards Committee and the Universitys quality assurance processes. A number of exemplars of generic feedback from previous sessions kindly provided by the School of Law and the School of the Environment and Society are available on the Swansea Academy of Learning and Teaching website. Also available are templates to facilitate the provision of feedback on examinations.

Section 4

59

4.4

POLICY ON ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF ASSESSED WORK

Colleges shall determine, via their assessment policy, in what format continually assessed work must be submitted subject to agreed adjustments for students with special circumstances. In only accepting electronic versions, Colleges must have robust data management systems in place to ensure that the work will be available for review by external examiners and for submission in the case of suspected unfair practice and/or appeals. Colleges should have clear guidelines not only on the storage of electronic assignments, but on the policy by which these are double marked, leaving a marking trail, and passed to external examiners. The systems must also be sufficiently robust to prevent unauthorised access, i.e. hacking which could be cited by students who are refuting allegations of unfair practice, for example. Students may not submit work on behalf of another and claims made e.g. in cases of appeal or unfair practice that the person submitting the work was not in fact the student in question will therefore not be accepted. The student whose student ID number is associated with the electronically submitted work is deemed to have authored the work and declares it to be their own with reference and acknowledgements to the work of others fully made. In making hardcopy submission, students may also be required to sign an appropriate declaration to this effect. All assessed work which contributes to a students qualification must be retained for a period of 1 year after the student candidature has ended (see the policy on retention of assessed work (section 4.5). Regulations governing the submission of postgraduate taught masters programmes and research students require the submission of both an electronic and hard-copy of the dissertation. In most cases, examinations are hand-written. The exceptions to this are for certain disabled students for which the use of computers has been approved as part of their specific learning, teaching and assessment provision. The above policy was approved by the Learning and Teaching Committee in 2007/08, being part of a wider paper on the use of TurnItIn plagiarism detection software.

4.5

POLICY ON RETENTION OF ASSESSED WORK

4.5.1 Introduction The University must retain course work and examination scripts for a specified period in order to meet academic, statutory and regulatory requirements. However, after this period, assessed coursework and examination scripts should be securely
60 Section 4

destroyed to avoid the build-up of documentation for reasons of health and safety, data protection and business efficiency. Student work should be retained by Colleges in accordance with the following requirements: To provide evidence in case of an appeal or suspected case of unfair practice a. All assessed material of students (i.e. examination scripts, assessed essays, posters, videotapes, dissertations etc.) which contributes to a final award must be retained for one year after the student has graduated or ceases to be an enrolled student of the University 2. This is a minimum period of retention and Colleges are free to keep assessed material for longer if they so wish (subject to guidelines in section 4.5.3). Assessed work can be stored in hard copy or electronically (whether submitted electronically or in hard copy) but where a hard-copy piece of assessment is scanned, there should be a statement to the effect that it is a true copy which should be signed, dated and the title of the person signing the authorisation. Where assessed work is submitted electronically via the Blackboard learning environment, it shall also be retained for one year following student graduation/cessation of enrolled student status. b. Where the assessed work is not in the form of a manuscript and storage presents significant practical difficulties, for example models or large portfolios, Colleges are not required to retain the work. However, particular care should be taken to document the outcomes of the assessment and this documentation should be retained and managed in accordance with the principles contained in these guidelines relating to the assessed work itself. Work should be returned to the student rather than destroyed and students should be clearly instructed to retain the work themselves until the degree outcome has been determined. c. Assessed material which does not contribute to the final award but is a required part of completion towards the award, e.g. at level 0 or 1 or must be retained for one year following date of submission to accommodate any requests for verification, appeals and/or complaints. With regard to the Department of Adult and Continuing Education, the University also recognises the volume of material involved and has agreed that retention of assessed materials at levels 0 and 1 is not necessary in every case, in particular where this does not explicitly form part of a validated certificate or degree programme.) d. Minor pieces of assessment such as routine laboratory reports and weekly exercises' such as problem classes or language exercises need not be retained. e. Any mark proformas or feedback sheets used should be retained for the same period as the work to which they refer.

This time limit is consistent with those institutions listed in Annex 1. While the advice from the JISC is that examinations scripts be retained for 3 years, it is not felt to be practical for issues of storage capacity, plus it is felt by the Universitys Records Manager that the time limit within our own procedures for appeals means that the Limitation Act would not apply (this states a 6 year time limit). Section 4 61

For quality assurance purposes It would be good practice to retain a sample of anonymised assessed work each year to provide evidence of the maintenance of standards, evidence of double marking practices, for example and as source material for staff training purposes. Question papers and mark sheets should be retained with the work, as should mark proformas and feedback sheets, if used. 4.5.2 Postgraduate Dissertations/Thesis A hard copy of each research postgraduate thesis is retained in the University Library. A hard copy of each PhD, MPhil, Professional Doctorate and MD thesis is also deposited in the National Library of Wales. If a College feels that a taught Masters dissertation contains sufficient original research content, then this may also be retained by the University Library, at the request of the College. In the case of taught postgraduate theses, the time limit in section 4.4.1 applies. [As part of the EThOS (Electronic Theses Online Service] and the Welsh Repositories Network, LIS and the Academic Registry are currently starting to consider the issues relating to the electronic submission and retention of theses and dissertations. At present, Colleges are asked to keep electronic copies of the dissertation/thesis]. 4.5.3 Retention of work for longer periods of time A College is entitled to retain work for a longer period of time for a number of reasons which might include: a. retaining project work which includes original data and/or analysis; b. retaining work for longitudinal surveys of trends in student achievement; c. retaining work to show future students as examples - e.g. of the presentation of a dissertation. It is recommended that such work be anonymised, wherever possible, unless written consent of the student concerned has been obtained. 4.5.4 Retention of work in online plagiarism detection systems Any student work may be uploaded to an online plagiarism detection system, at the discretion of individual Colleges. Students are advised of this on their enrolment form. To support the aim of detecting and discouraging plagiarism, work uploaded in this way shall remain in the plagiarism detection system indefinitely. (Currently, the University uses the TurnitIn plagiarism detection software. Its policy on retention of submissions is as follows: Turnitin: How long will the service keep my work? The service will seek to retain content submitted to it and associated data until the termination of this service or its successor, thus helping to accumulate as large a corpus of knowledge as possible against which to compare submitted content.
62 Section 4

4.5.5 Retention of Supervisory records on student progress All reports on student progress with respect to dissertations or theses (i.e. notes held by supervisors and formal reports submitted to College and University committees for all years of study) must be retained by the College for a period of 1 year following graduation. 4.5.6 Retention of Examination boards decisions The University retains Examination and Progression board minutes and associated paperwork, including Report and Results forms for research students indefinitely. Student marks and progression decisions are held centrally on electronic systems which are also retained indefinitely. 4.5.7 Storage and subsequent disposal of retained work All assessed work which is retained should be kept in a secure location and organised to enable effective management. At the end of the retention period, all retained work should be disposed of as confidential waste unless the College wishes to provide students with a reasonably brief window of opportunity to collect it. Colleges should contact the Universitys Records manager for advice. 4.5.8 Information to Students The College policy on the retention of student work should be made available to students via the handbook or website. The policy and procedures for the retention and disposal of assessment material may form part of a wider Document Retention Schedule, which is prepared in accordance with the Universitys Records Management Policy. Colleges should nominate a member of staff to assume overall responsibility for the systematic operation of these procedures and to ensure that all staff and students are aware of them. 4.5.9 Exemptions This policy and associated procedures does not apply to research data / information collected for an ethically approved research project during the course of a research masters programme (MPhil, MRes), Phd programme or a staff research project. The responsibility for determining the retention period for such data / information remains with the College in which the student is enrolled and subject to any requirements of the funding source for the research (if any).

Section 4

63

4.6

USE OF TURNITIN PLAGIARISM DETECTION SOFTWARE

4.6.1 Introduction The University makes it clear in its Unfair Practice procedures in its on-line Academic Guide and templates for College Handbooks that plagiarism is taken seriously and that plagiarism detection software may be used. It further states that students may be allowed to use the software as a means of checking whether any unattributed text remains within the assignment. The main software in use at the University is TurnItIn which is inherently linked within the Blackboard e-learning platform, or could be used separately if the assignment has not been submitted via Blackboard. See the Knowledge Base Tab on any BlackBoard screen for further details. However TurnitIn is only one of the tools used for detecting plagiarism. Other means include using Google searches, recognising differences in style both between and within assessments. Upon enrolment students must agree to the following statement: I acknowledge that any work submitted electronically during the period of my enrolment at Swansea University may also be submitted via electronic plagiarism detection software. 4.6.2 Use of TurnItIn as a Learning Tool on avoiding plagiarism Students should be encouraged, but not regard it as a right, to submit draft assignments via the plagiarism software detection service on a trial basis before submission of final versions as a basis for learning about correct referencing and how to avoid plagiarism. This must however be done using the revision assignment feature in Turnitin otherwise these prior submissions remain in the Turnitin database and may cause false positives when the assignments are submitted later. This should however be restricted to students who have recently commenced their programme of study at Swansea and this facility should decrease over time to promote student learning. In the case of students who enrol on programmes which are one year in duration or who enter in levels 2 or 3 of an undergraduate programme, the opportunities to use the software should be restricted e.g. to the first semester. Where it is used as a Learning Tool guidance should be offered to students about the interpretation of originality reports, in particular the limitations of the TurnItIn software use of paragraph marks, exclusion of references, inclusion of titles of assignments, and most importantly that the TurnItIn database which acts as a crossreference is not fully comprehensive and that subject staff may well use other means of providing evidence in cases of alleged plagiarism. 4.6.3 Marking and when to look at the Originality Reports All assignments must be marked anonymously before any reference is made to the originality reports. There is an optional facility which allows the user identification to be anonymous in Turnitin until after a set post date (generally the post date should the date on which first marking is completed). If anonymity is used then it is not
64 Section 4

possible to match a plagiarism report to a paper until after the set post date. Exceptionally an instructor or administrator can reveal a reports identity but will be required to give their identity, and reason for doing so, to provide an audit trail should it be needed later. 4.6.4 Interpretation of the Originality Reports The originality reports are not straightforward to interpret. A particular phrase may be highlighted as plagiarised, but on inspection by subject staff, it is clear that there are very limited ways in which one could describe a particular piece of equipment/research finding for example. False positive also include repeat wording of assignments, quoted material, references to URLs. The matched sources may also change according to the reports chosen. It may not always be possible to discard 1% matches as these could also be found in other sources. Above all, it must be subject staff who do the interpretation and not administrative staff. Subject staff are best placed to determine if the work in question is indeed plagiarised, poorly referenced or poorly paraphrased. Subject staff can also detect whether a piece of work has been plagiarised, in part or whole, based on their own experience, even if the TurnItIn reports indicate otherwise. (This is because of the limited data source of the software). Above all, it must be emphasised that the academic judgment of staff with the relevant subject expertise must be paramount in cases of alleged unfair practice.

The University will provide training or further guidance to staff on the interpretation of Originality Reports resulting from the use of TurnItIn software. 4.6.5 Determining an Acceptable Level of Originality It is extremely difficult to determine an acceptable level of originality. Turnitin uses a traffic light colouring system with 0-24% as green, indicating limited amounts of matched text detected. It is possible that as a guideline that Colleges examine work above this threshold, although some Colleges may wish to apply lower thresholds and the exact percentage used as a threshold for further investigation should be at the discretion of the Board of Studies, e.g. taking into account issues such as the level of study, type of question set etc. Review of originality report results should only be done after marking of the assignments. As noted above, the TurnItIn database is not infallible. It will only cross-reference submitted work against work already in its database, or work which it has agreements to access. An originality report may therefore be misleading and those with low percentage levels may indeed be plagiarised from other sources. It is therefore crucial that subject staff mark assignments anonymously first and then only cross-reference to the Originality Report. Staff may also want to examine other sources if they suspect plagiarism, e.g. simple Google searches may reveal relevant work or discuss their suspicions with colleagues.

Section 4

65

4.6.6 Administrative Issues arising from using TurnItIn TurnItIn provides administrative help in that receipts for submission of work are issued and that staff know exactly when work is submitted and can therefore apply penalties for late submission (extenuating circumstances of course being taken into consideration according to College procedures). In Law for example, while hardcopy version of assignments are mandatory, no receipt is issued since the electronic receipt upon submission of the assignment via TurnItIn is deemed acceptable evidence. Caution should be taken to ensure that students are fully aware of the procedures for electronic submission, since there have been cases where errors have occurred and that while the student received a receipt it was simply to acknowledge the storage of their assignment and not its actual submission. Where Turnitin is being used as the main means of submission then Colleges must download the assignment documents by the end of each academic year. Tools are provided by Turnitin to download all the papers in a single zip file) These electronic documents must be securely stored in the same way and for the same length of time as paper copies would have been (see policy on retention of assessed work). Where marking is done using paper submissions random checks should be made to ensure that the paper a student has submitted to Turnitin is the same as the marked paper copy. It is also worth noting that as most UK HEIs subscribe to the JISC Plagiarism Advisory Service, then they will be using TurnItIn, as this is the platform provided through the Service. The recent Academic Misconduct Benchmarking Research Project Part II3 noted a wide variation in penalties for plagiarism across UK HEIs. As with other cases of student misconduct, it is important that Swansea University has consistently applied penalties for plagiarism across all Colleges. Reference should be made to the Unfair Practice guidelines and regulations and any advice should be sought from the Unfair Practice Coordinator in the Academic Registry. 4.6.7 Guides on Avoiding Plagiarism Each College is required within its Student Handbook to provide guidance to students on avoiding plagiarism and proper referencing. This is often supplemented by inclusion in study skills modules and in student induction. Considerable efforts are made by Swansea University to ensure that students know what plagiarism is and the consequences of being found guilty of this in their assessments. Staff are urged to follow the Unfair Practice procedures found in the Academic Guide and to liaise with the Unfair Practice Coordinator in the Academic Registry for further advice and guidance. Notes: The College of Human and Health Science has a very useful internal document for the interpretation of TurnItIn reports which could be adopted by other Colleges and is
Tennant P. and F. Duggan (May 2008) the Amber Project Executive Summary: Academic Misconduct Benchmarking Research Project Part II: The Recorded Incidence of Student Plagiarism and the Penalties Applied. (http://www.jiscpas.ac.uk/documents/amber/ExecSummary.pdf) 66 Section 4
3

available from the Quality Office, Academic Registry. Further information can also be found on the Turnitin website.

4.7

POLICY ON ANONYMOUS MARKING

4.7.1 Anonymity in formal written examinations All formal written examinations of Swansea University and of the University of Wales shall be marked in the anonymous state. Candidates in such examinations may be identified only by their student number until such time as both first and double marking have been completed. 4.7.2 Anonymity in methods of assessment other than the written examinations The University encourages Colleges to mark other forms of assessment in the anonymous state. It is however recognised that feedback from certain elements of assessment form an integral part of the learning experience and where Colleges have identified such, they are free to continue current practice. Methods of assessment that involve observation, interaction and oral/aural elements shall not be subject to anonymity. Colleges shall inform students, by means of handbooks and module literature, the means by which modules shall be assessed and whether or not such assessment shall be marked in the anonymous state. 4.7.3 Disclosure of identity Anonymity should be protected for as long as is possible. The University acknowledges that preserving the anonymity of a student's marks may not in all cases preserve the anonymity of the student; candidates who have submitted extenuating circumstances to a College shall be identified in order that such circumstances may be properly taken into account; in the course of the year provisional marks that contribute to classification or progression may have been released to students as an appropriate and necessary means of student feedback. anonymity is not maintained for final degree classifications.

Colleges may conduct Subject Level examination boards without the disclosure of candidates' names. University Level Progression and Award Boards shall for the current time be conducted by name. 4.7.4 Disclosure of marks Progression and final award decisions shall not be published by Colleges but will be communicated to students by the Academic Registry. Subsequent to this communication, for purposes of the degree ceremonies, Colleges shall be permitted to publish the award decision by student name. In this case, students should be given the option of requesting that their name and results be omitted from any such publication.
Section 4 67

Where individual assessment marks and module marks are made available on a basis that is not confidential, Colleges should adhere to the following:

All academic results must be published by student number. Colleges shall be required to inform students of the Colleges practice of publishing individual assessment marks and module marks in the College Handbook Any publication of results which have not been confirmed by the appropriate College/University Level Progression and Award Boards must include a clear statement that the results are provisional and subject to University ratification.

The above policy on anonymous marking was approved by the Learning and Teaching Committee on 21 October 1999 and endorsed by Senate in December 1999. Minor amendments were made by the Learning and Teaching Committee at its meetings on 25 May 2000 and 20 January 2005. The section on disclosure of marks was approved by the Academic Board in 2009. 4.8 POLICY ON DOUBLE MARKING

4.8.1 Policy on Double Marking for all Taught Programmes and Modules The University accepts a variety in double marking by recognising the varying demands of different disciplines and the different requirements of various types of assessed material. Colleges should choose the most appropriate practices for their programmes from models of double marking using agreed criteria. The choice of approaches for double marking is outlined below. Note that in double marking taught postgraduate dissertations/project work submitted for Part II, Colleges must choose either universal double blind or universal non-blind double marking approaches as outlined in section 4.8.3 below and additionally will also be expected to employ an arithmetical check that addition and transcription are correct. The other models of double marking are NOT permitted. The double marking practices adopted within the University are based on the following general principles. Double marking practices should: seek to ensure accuracy and fairness be appropriate and acceptable to the discipline being taught be suitable to the material being assessed be suitable to the means of assessment being used be clearly evidenced, either in the form of annotations by both markers on the piece of assessed work, or a separate cover sheet This choice should be published, formal, recorded and reaffirmed or changed as part of regular programme or module reviews. Proposals for new programmes and new modules should indicate, as part of their statements on assessment, arrangements for the double marking of examinations and assessed work. The double marking policy applies to all aspects of student assessment that contribute to the award or final classification of an award, including: conventional examinations formally assessed coursework such as projects or dissertations,
68 Section 4

 laboratory or other practical work. Where modules include more than one method of assessment (e.g. include continuous assessment and/or practical work and/or formal written examinations) the predominant method of assessment shall be subject to double marking. At all other levels that do not contribute to the final award, double marking need only, as a minimum, apply to failed work and work close to the borderline for tolerated failures (the borderline is 30% for undergraduate modules and 40% for taught postgraduate/level M modules). 4.8.2 Exemptions from the Policy Where assessment methods are automated (i.e. the answers are machine or optically read), or in quantitative assessments in which model answers are provided to the marker, these assessments are exempt from this policy. 4.8.3 Models of Double Marking Colleges will be expected to employ one of the forms of double marking indicated below 4 and will also be expected to employ an arithmetical check that addition and transcription are correct. (Note the method of double marking may of course vary according to the nature of the assessment for the module). a. Universal double blind marking The first marker makes no notes of any kind on the work being marked and the second marker examines the script/dissertation (especially for taught postgraduate programmes) as it was submitted by the student. Both examiners record their marks and comments separately and then compare marks and resolve differences to produce an agreed mark. Agreed marks and comments may only then be entered. b. Universal non-blind double marking The first marker writes comments on the script/dissertation (especially for taught postgraduate programmes) and the second marker assesses the work with this information known. No actual marks are disclosed; or marks are, for example, written on the back cover of an examination book. Second markers may be required or advised not to take into account the first marks in determining their own marks or may be required to resolve differences in marks for all cases or within ranges as part of their second marking responsibilities. Written comments by the first examiner make second marking easier by guiding the second marker. c. Universal second marking as check or audit

Note: in Double marking taught postgraduate dissertations or project work submitted for Part II, Colleges may choose either model a (universal double blind) or b (universal non-blind double marking) in addition to performing the arithmetic check on addition and transcription. Section 4 69

The first marker annotates the work fully and awards a mark. The role of the second marker is to check that first marking has been done correctly, that mark schemes have been properly applied, and that the total mark is arithmetically correct. The first marker leaves a clear trail to be audited. The purpose of second marking is to check on standards for all work and may be extended to reviews or thorough second marking of selected work e.g., fails, marks just below the lower boundary of a class, or firsts. d. Second marking as sampling or moderation The second marker samples work already first marked, with annotations and marks attached, in order to check overall standards. This may be used where first markers are less experienced, where there are several first markers and consistency may be a problem or where unusual patterns of performance are expected or observed. It may lead to more extensive marking if problems are detected. The second marker may be the arbiter in such cases or may be responsible for alerting the examiner(s) with overall responsibility for the module. e. Partial second marking Any of the above may be applied to particular types of marks e.g., fails, firsts, or borderlines. 4.8.4 Resolving differences between markers Whatever method is used for double-marking there must be a method of resolving differences between markers. These are as follows: discussion and negotiation between the two markers on all differences; discussion and negotiation between the markers on specified differences e.g., for relatively large differences, fails, firsts, borderlines or differences across degree classes. If a size criterion is used its value or range of values should be agreed and specified; taking the mean of different marks: this may be done for all differences, for relatively small differences or differences within a degree class, or where both marks are clearly above or below the pass-fail line or above or below limits for compensation. It is recommended that where differences straddle critical boundaries the differences should be settled by discussion and negotiation; resort to a third marker. This should be an additional internal examiner. Only in exceptional circumstances should the external examiner be asked to resolve differences between markers.

Differences between markers cannot be left unresolved. 4.8.5 The role of the External examiner in double/second marking External examiners, at both the undergraduate and taught postgraduate level should act as moderators only, and NOT as second markers. Colleges should appoint a third marker in the case of dispute or go outside the College/University to appoint a second marker for dissertations/project work if necessary. It is incumbent on the College to identify any difficulties that might occur in second marking of postgraduate
70 Section 4

taught dissertations/project work early and must ensure that anyone appointed to second mark who is external to the College is appropriately trained and has the marking criteria. (See the Postgraduate Taught Masters Degrees Regulations, Examination of the Dissertation available on the Academic Guide.) 4.8.6 Issues to be considered by Colleges in determining their double marking practices Where students follow modules in another College, the double marking methods chosen for assessment should be determined by the discipline. Students following the same module should be subject to the same double-marking practices. Suitable marking schemes must be provided for assessment on modules where double marking occurs. It is expected that external examiners see not only draft examination papers and other types of assessments which they normally have responsibility for advising on, but also marking schemes for such assessments. Where students work is double marked, both first and second markers should have equal information and guidance for their marking. There should be clear evidence that double marking has taken place, either in the form of clear annotations by both markers directly on the piece of assessed work or, by means of a separate cover sheet. Colleges should bear in mind the information needed to provide assurance that quality standards are maintained under the schemes of double marking which they use. College Learning and Teaching Committees should ensure that suitable monitoring of double marking takes place. Colleges should ensure that the selection of markers meets acceptable teaching quality standards (e.g. postgraduate students should not be sole markers, in accordance with current Senate Guidelines, see the Guide to the Employment of Research Students which is included in the Other University Regulations section of the on-line Academic Guide.) Where full-time members of the academic staff (or their equivalent) are supplemented by others (e.g., postgraduates, research assistants or outside lecturers) in double marking schemes, full-time academic staff (or their equivalent) will assume primary marking or moderating responsibilities. Where markers are not full-time academic staff, they should be assigned duties compatible with their experience and capacities. Double marking practices should be determined for the assessment(s) within a given module and should be discipline-specific. The College which approves a module should also approve its double-marking arrangements. 4.8.7 Criteria for Choice of Double Marking Schemes The following are criteria which should be taken into account in determining appropriate schemes of double marking: The nature of the material being assessed
Section 4 71

Whether material is qualitative or quantitative; whether marking requires the judgement of the examiner or merely the checking of objective fact; whether material is presented in essays or numerical answers; whether questions and answers are structured or unstructured; whether questions are multiple choice or open; whether assessment involves short, discrete questions or questions which have a wide coverage. The level of study of the module The importance of objective second opinion increases for all assessment which contributes to the final degree classification or qualification outcome, e.g. for taught postgraduate programmes. Resource considerations Availability of suitable staff to act as markers; student numbers; deadlines. The form of assessment
Conventional examination; other assessed work such as essays, projects, case studies, practicals, orals, presentations, individual or group work. Note: taught postgraduate dissertations may use only universal double approaches.

The norms for the discipline With reference to the subject benchmark statement and the normal practice in the same subject in other institutions. 4.8.8 Prescription of minimum acceptable standards While it is not appropriate for the University to lay down narrowly defined standards for double marking practice, some general minimum acceptable standards should be adopted, namely: Decisions on the selection of double marking practices, taken by or approved by Colleges, when they approve modules, should be formal and recorded and should relate to the criteria set out above; The double marking practices adopted within the University should be based on the following general principles. They should seek to ensure accuracy and fairness in marking be appropriate and acceptable to the discipline being taught be suitable to the material being assessed be suitable to the means of assessment being used be clearly evidenced

The Learning and Teaching Committee has adopted that in regards to the double marking of taught postgraduate dissertations, the only two acceptable models are those involving a universal double marking approach, either blind or non-blind.

The above policy on double marking was approved by the Learning and Teaching Committee on 22 May 2002 and endorsed by Senate in July 2002. Minor amendments have been made in subsequent sessions following discussions by the Learning and Teaching Committee and the Universitys Academic Board in 2010.
72 Section 4

4.9

POLICY ON THE SUBMISSION OF ILLEGIBLE EXAMINATION SCRIPTS

In cases where an examiner and an appropriate second marker find a substantial part of an examination script to be illegible the College may take one of the following three actions: 1. In cases where reading the illegible script would take an academic an unreasonable amount of time and would not permit appropriate consideration of the text the College may choose to use transcription services with the cost being passed to the candidate; 2. In cases where the script is entirely illegible the candidate will be required to attend campus to dictate their script to a third party in the presence of an invigilator. The student will be expected to pay for these services; 3. Where neither of the above options are applicable, the institution reserves the right to award a 0% mark. Colleges are expected to continue to work closely with the University Disability Office to ensure that this approach does not disadvantage students.

4.10 GUIDELINES ON ASSESSMENT OTHER THAN THE LANGUAGE OF TUITION 4.10.1 Assessments through the medium of Welsh The teaching and assessment language of the University is predominantly English, but in accordance with the Universitys Welsh Language Policy and Policy on Assessment, students may submit assessed work in Welsh. It is a students responsibility to determine whether or not they are competent in the Welsh language, including appropriate technical terminology for the subjects concerned. Students must be aware that marks may be deducted for poor spelling/punctuation/grammar in accordance with the College(s) policy on this matter. Students must submit a written request to the Academic Registrar within one month of the start of the relevant module(s) to be permitted to submit examinations, dissertations or theses in Welsh. The Academic Registrar will then arrange for translation of questions, scripts, dissertation/thesis where required. Students must also notify their College(s) of any desire to be assessed in the Welsh language (oral and written work). This notification is also required within one month of the start of the relevant student modules. See the College handbook for relevant procedures. 4.10.2 Translation of Assessment Questions Where a Welsh language translation of an examination paper has been provided for an English-medium module, students should also be permitted to view the English language paper and to respond through the medium of English should they choose to do so. This approach is taken in order to ensure that the opportunity for students
Section 4 73

to be assessed in the language of their choosing does not compromise the students ability to achieve to their maximum. This policy DOES NOT apply for students pursuing modules in which proficiency/ competency in another language must be demonstrated. 4.10.3 Marking of assessed work submitted in Welsh For programmes taught through the medium of English Under the Universitys Welsh Language Scheme, students may submit their assessments in Welsh if they wish. In assuring the reliability of the assessment process the University encourages assignments to be marked by the individual teaching on that topic as its first principle. However where the internal examiner is not a fluent Welsh speaker, the Academic Registry will arrange for translation. Where necessary, an external translator will be appointed to deal with subjects with highly technical terminology. The University scrutinises the competencies of external translators very carefully to ensure that they correctly convey the technicalities of the subject. The University shall adopt appropriate means for verifying the accuracy of translation. In accordance with our anonymous marking policy, all formal examinations shall be marked in the anonymous state. However, in-programme assessments, e.g. oral/aural elements, continuous assessment and dissertations/theses are not always subject to anonymity. In these circumstances, every effort shall be made to ensure that there shall be no conflict of interest between translators and students. Translators shall be independent from the teaching, examining and marking processes. Assessed work shall be translated into appropriate English, with adjustments for poor grammar, punctuation, etc. The translator must however note issues where the written/oral Welsh is poor and where accommodations have been made so that the internal examiner may make any adjustments to marks in accordance with College marking criteria. Assessment questions shall also be translated into Welsh, as appropriate, but internal examiners must ensure that students will be aware of and understand any technical terminology that has been translated. There must be comparable expectations and standards of students work regardless of the language of submission. Marking criteria must therefore be fair and appropriate to either language. For programmes taught through the medium of Welsh As a first principle, we encourage assignments to be marked by the individual teaching on that topic.

74

Section 4

As a second principle, we encourage the appointment of a Welsh speaking external examiner who is linguistically and academically competent to make judgements on the original language text or oral assessments. Welsh speaking competency is requested in the nomination form for external examiners. The University of Wales also maintain a database of Welsh-speaker external examiners to which Swansea University has access to assist in identifying appropriate expertise. Good Practice Where a bilingual external examiner is appointed, it is good practice if the examiner reviews assessments in English as well as Welsh to compare and confirm standards.

4.11 ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT PROCESSES FOR STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES The University is aware that various factors during a student's career might affect academic performance. Illness is the most common factor responsible for student under-performance but other extenuating circumstances are as valid e.g. bereavement involving a close relative. The Universitys publication Guidelines for Colleges for dealing with students with extenuating circumstances and/or special needs explains in further detail the procedures which should be followed by students and Colleges in taking these factors into consideration in the assessment process. Student Services has also developed guidelines and a policy on the reasonable adjustments that must be made to teaching, learning and assessment processes for students with dyslexia and specific learning difficulties. Follow the link on the Academic Registry website within the A-Z guide listed under E for Extenuating Circumstances (http://www.swansea.ac.uk/registry/A-ZGuide/) for the guidelines and policy. The University encourages anticipatory action to support the needs of disabled students in submission of new module proformas, in introducing new programmes of study and in undertaking annual monitoring and periodic review.

Section 4

75

4.12

REGULATIONS FOR EXTERNAL EXAMINING OF TAUGHT PROGRAMMES

4.12.1 General All external examiners are ultimately responsible to Senate, which is empowered by Statute to regulate all University of Wales and Swansea University examinations. The Management Board shall be empowered by the University Senate and Council to determine the fees and other expenses to be paid to External Examiners. External Examiners shall be appointed by the Academic Boards on behalf of the Universitys Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee which has delegated authority from the Vice-Chancellor. External Examiners shall normally be appointed for a period of four years, with a possibility of re-appointment for a fifth year subject to the approval of the Academic Board. External Examiners shall be required to declare any interest or ties with Swansea University or its staff, programmes of study or students. External Examiners for collaborative programmes of study shall be nominated in consultation with the collaborative institution and shall be appointed in accordance with regulations outlined in this document. 4.12.2 Criteria for Appointment External Examiners shall be appointed according to the following criteria: One or more External Examiners shall be appointed for each programme of study to ensure coverage for all aspects of that programme. The nomination of External Examiners to be appointed and the number of Examiners shall be determined by the Head of College in accordance with the nature of the programme and number of students. The nomination(s) shall be submitted for approval by the appropriate Dean of Academic Board. 5 Nominations for External Examiner appointments should normally be from within the higher education system and possess appropriate levels of academic and, where appropriate, other professional expertise and experience in relation to the relevant subject area and assessment and be able to command the respect of people in their profession. External Examiners for programmes of study leading to awards of the federal University of Wales should not be drawn from member institutions or collaborative partner institutions of the University of Wales. 6

Where an academically diverse programme is being examined, the number of external examiners to be appointed should reflect the student FTE load, the number of subject areas being covered and the availability to mark work for some students pursuing subjects through the medium of Welsh.
6

In order to accommodate the special difficulties inherent in the external examination of Welshmedium work, a member of staff from another institution within the University of Wales may be appointed as an Associate Examiner to carry out such duties where no suitable examiner external to 76 Section 4

Examiners from outside the higher education system may exceptionally be appointed as External Examiners provided that such persons possess the relevant expertise and experience to fulfil the requirements for appointment as External Examiners. Such External Examiners shall not have sole responsibility for a programme of study. It is recommended that new external examiners who have not held the position before at another institution, or are from outside the higher education system, should normally shadow the outgoing external examiner during the final year of their tenure. The number of external examinerships held by persons being considered for nomination as External Examiners should not normally exceed two during the External Examiners period of appointment. Former members of staff or students shall not be invited to be nominated for appointment as an External Examiner before a lapse of at least three years from the date of departure, or sufficient time for students taught by that member of staff or associated with that student to have completed that programme of study, whichever is the longer. Other than in exceptional circumstances, an External Examiner shall not be re-appointed before a lapse of at least three years. The making of reciprocal arrangements for external examining with staff teaching similar programmes of study at other institutions is not permissible. An External Examiner shall not normally be succeeded by another from the same institution.

4.12.3 Contractual Arrangements The appointment of an External Examiner may, in exceptional circumstances, be terminated prior to the completion of the period of appointment. Such circumstances would normally be either a failure by the External Examiner to fulfil the duties and responsibilities of external examiners prescribed in the regulations or following the discontinuation or non-recruitment to the relevant programme of study. The Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Experience) shall have the authority to issue letters of premature termination upon the recommendation of the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee. Where a College wishes to continue the appointment of an External Examiner or, in exceptional circumstances, appoint an External Examiner who contravenes the general criteria for appointment, the College must submit justification as to why this is necessary. All requests for extensions shall be submitted to the Academic Registry in the first instance, and the documentation supplied shall be scrutinised by the Dean of the Academic Board who has authority to approve or decline the continued period of appointment. Requests for appointment/extension of appointment which contravenes the criteria will be considered by the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee. 4.12.4 Role, Duties and Powers of External Examiners All external examiners shall be expected to:
the University of Wales can be found. In such a case, it must be ascertained that no contact has been established between the Associate Examiner and the candidates to be assessed. Section 4 77

comment upon the standards of awards and that awards are comparable to all appropriate nationally recognised standards; ensure that assessment methods are fair, that assessment is operated fairly and in accordance with University regulations; review the assessment performance of students individually and as a cohort; consider and approve all draft examination papers; consider and approve all in-programme, practical and other assessments that contribute 50% or more of the assessment for a module; receive examination papers, in-programme assessments, practical assessments and project reports/dissertations etc to determine the basis upon which marks have been awarded which shall include a sample of work from all levels of performance; attend and make recommendations to Examining Boards relating to the awards of degrees, diplomas and certificates; endorse agreed final marks and/or pass lists for candidates by means of a signature to confirm that the list represents the marks awarded by the Examination Board and that such marks have been arrived at fairly; be consulted on curriculum development, including the introduction of new programmes of study and revisions to the existing programmes of study; make a full report on the assessment process to the University on an annual basis; immediately report any circumstances relating to allegations of unfair practice in writing to the Chair of the Examining Board concerned.

External Examiners shall have enough evidence to determine that internal marking and classifications are of an appropriate standing and are consistent. They shall inspect a sufficient amount of work of the candidates to enable them to arrive at a judgement that can be applied to the assessment as a whole. All External examiners shall ensure that the assessment procedures are adhered to through a consideration of all or a sample of assessments, where the volume of assessments sent to the external examiner will depend on the following factors: The number of students in the cohort; Ensuring representative distribution of marks for the cohort, i.e. samples in each classification band, including fails and exceptional performance; Whether this is the first cohort of a newly validated programme. See the Postgraduate Taught Masters Degrees regulations Examination of the Dissertation for more information on sampling of dissertations. The role of the External examiner is to moderate, and NOT to second mark assessments. External examiners may, but are not required to, meet with students on programmes that they are examining, e.g. to obtain general feedback on the quality of teaching, clarity of information, academic/personal support, etc. In their final year of appointment, external examiners may have to shadow Examiners with no prior experience as an External Examiner or those from outside the higher education system (as appropriate).
78 Section 4

Where the approved method of assessment for a particular module includes an oral examination, External Examiners may be invited to participate in such oral examinations. The Role of the Chief External Examiner The Chief External Examiner shall be expected to: i. Review a cross section of assessed work in order to ensure equity across modules and quality assure the programme as a whole. ii. Identify areas of good practice or concern across the programme. iii. Act as an arbitrator on occasions when there is disagreement between the internal and External Examiners. Failure to reach a mutual agreement during such an arbitration shall result in a referral to the Pro-ViceChancellor in accordance with regulation 4.12.10 in the Universitys Teaching Quality Manual. 4.12.5 Preparation of External Examiners External examiners shall be provided with induction by the University to ensure that they understand and can fulfil their responsibilities. The Academic Registry shall supply all newly appointed External Examiners with the following documentation following confirmation of acceptance of appointment:
Guidance for External Examiners Handbook Induction arrangements A copy of the final report from the previous external examiner for the programme of study (where applicable) and the College response.

Colleges shall provide all newly appointed External Examiners with the following documentation following confirmation of acceptance of appointment: A copy of the Programme Specification(s) A copy of any Handbook or Brochure for the programme of study A copy of the relevant syllabuses and schedules of assessment for the programme(s) of study concerned, together with notification of the date set for the meeting of the Examining Board A copy of the College Assessment Policy, including marking criteria, late penalties, extenuating circumstances, second and double marking practices etc.

The Academic Registry and the College shall provide further documentation on an annual basis, as outlined in the External Examiners Handbook. Colleges should also ensure that External Examiners are informed at the commencement of each academic year of the date of the Examining Board meeting(s), procedures for the submission of draft examination papers and other assessments for approval and arrangements for the approval of supplementary assessments. It is considered good practice to submit main and supplementary examination papers for approval at the same time.

Section 4

79

For those Examiners with no prior experience as an External Examiner or from outside the higher education system, they would be expected to shadow the outgoing External Examiner during the final year of their tenure. The incoming Examiner would be asked to attend award boards but will not have any other duties as an External Examiner. 4.12.6 Viva Voce Examinations The University policy states that viva voce examinations shall not be permitted for the purpose of determining degree classifications for candidates pursuing initial degrees. University regulations do however permit the use of oral examinations for students pursuing taught postgraduate programmes. The College shall determine the principles for selecting students for viva voce examinations in accordance with University policy and taking due account of the views of the External Examiner. 4.12.7 Unfair Practice An external examiner who, either in the course of the marking period or subsequently, considers that a candidate has engaged in an unfair assessment practice shall immediately report the circumstances in writing to the Chair of the Examining Board concerned, who shall then invoke the Universitys Unfair Practice Procedures. The procedures for dealing with such cases of unfair practice shall be published in the Universitys Academic Guide.

4.12.8 Examining Boards The External Examiner(s) shall perform all the tasks normally associated with examinations such as the approval of examination papers. The external examiner(s) shall not be required to attend Interim Examining Board meetings but may do so if he/she wishes. Consultation shall take place by correspondence or other appropriate means. The External Examiner(s) are normally required by the University to be present at the meeting of the Examining Board(s) at which the examination results in the subject(s) in which they have been involved are determined. If an External Examiner, exceptionally, cannot attend a meeting where his/her presence is formally required, he/she should be available for consultation by telephone, video network or other suitable means with the Chair, and the Chair shall despatch to the External Examiner, in accordance with his/her directions, all documents necessary for the due performance of the business of the meeting. For undergraduate and postgraduate taught masters awards, the College shall establish subject-level Examining Boards to confirm module marks and to make recommendations to the appropriate University Award/Progression Board. The External Examiner(s) shall be present at the subject-level Board. In the case of subject-level Examining Boards considering the Part Two results of postgraduate
80 Section 4

taught masters awards, the External Examiner(s) shall be available for consultation. For undergraduate and postgraduate taught masters awards, the University shall establish University Boards to award credit, determine progression issues, award degrees (including postgraduate certificates and diplomas), agree final degree classifications (as appropriate), and award exit qualifications. Regulations governing all aspects of undergraduate and postgraduate taught masters assessment shall be published in the appropriate assessment regulations handbook. 4.12.9 External Examiners Reports External Examiners shall be required by the University to submit written reports annually. External Examiners comments on the examining process shall be required, including observations on the structure and content of the programme of study and its delivery. External Examiners shall be expected to forward their report to the University within six weeks of the Examining Board (for Examining Boards held in June). However, in the cases of External Examiners whose examining boards are held at times other than June, the reports are expected within a period of one month following the meeting. External examiners of taught postgraduate programmes are expected to communicate any concerns about the part 1 element of the programme to the programme staff following the part 1 examination board so that any actions required can be introduced prior to the module being taught again. These comments can then be incorporated into the annual written report prepared by the examiner which is submitted to the University by December 15th. In the event of an examiner not submitting a report, the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Experience) shall be empowered to take such steps as appropriate to the circumstances to obtain it, and/or may choose to issue a letter of premature termination as a result. External Examiners reports shall be returned to the Academic Registry, including, where relevant, reports on programme delivered through collaborative partners. Copies of reports shall be circulated to the Principal of the relevant collaborative partner institution and to the Chair of the Examining Board. External Examiners reports for collaborative programmes shall be scrutinised in accordance with the Universitys procedures for processing examiners reports as outlined in the Teaching Quality Manual. The University attaches considerable importance to the External Examiners report and payment of the fee is conditional upon its receipt. 4.12.10 Arbitrating Examiners External Examiners shall be bound by the academic and assessment regulations of the University.
Section 4 81

If a disagreement arises between the External Examiner and the relevant undergraduate Examining Board regarding issues of standards, the views of the External Examiner shall normally prevail. The Board may appeal, in exceptional circumstances, to the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Experience) or another Pro ViceChancellor (where the PVC Student Experience is unavailable or is in conflict of interest). The decision of the Pro Vice-Chancellor shall be final. When the decision of an External Examiner considering a dissertation submitted for a Masters degree by Examination and Dissertation gives rise to a case of dispute between the External Examiner(s) and internal examiners it is within the power of the Pro-Vice Chancellor (Student Experience) to decide on the matter, at his/her discretion, or to appoint another External Examiner to provide an independent opinion. The Pro-Vice Chancellor (Student Experience) may take into account any written reports submitted by members of the Examining Board. In choosing a second External Examiner the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Experience) may also take into account, but need not be bound by, the nomination (if any) of an Examining Board for a second External Examiner. A decision on whether or not to reconvene the Examining Board shall be at the discretion of this second External Examiner whose decision on this matter shall be final. 4.13 ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS IN NOMINATING/APPOINTING EXTERNAL EXAMINERS 4.13.1 General Administrative procedures for nominating External Examiners A nomination form should be completed in full by the Head of College and submitted to the Academic Registrar. It must be accompanied by a full CV. The form under Web Link 10 (Appendix 14) must be used for undergraduate programmes, Web Link 11 is used for Taught Masters programmes and Web Link 12 is used to nominate examiners for Nursing programmes. While Senate retains ultimate responsibility for the approval of External Examiner appointments, in practice it delegates approval to the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee to undertake this process. This Committee in turn delegates authority for the approval of External Examiners nominations to the relevant Academic Boards. Upon receipt of completed nomination forms, a preliminary check of the proforma against the criteria is undertaken. Nomination forms without CVs or which require justification for any exceptional circumstances will be returned to the College for further details. If the nomination does not meet the required criteria, the matter is referred to the Chair of the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee for consideration see section 4.13.2. If the nomination is straightforward, the Academic Registrar shall forward the completed form to the appropriate Dean of Academic Board and consider the evidence in support of the nomination. The Dean may request further details from
82 Section 4

the Head of College if required and may also refer nominations back to the College concerned. The written approval of External Examiners nominations is returned to the Academic Registrar for the issuing of formal appointment letters and supporting documentation. Following the successful validation of a new programme academic staff are encouraged to initiate the nomination process for an external examiner in good time, bearing in mind the expected completion date of the first cohort. Academic Registry staff write to Heads of Colleges when the terms of appointment for their examiners is due to end to prompt the nomination of replacement external examiners, where required. The above procedures are summarised in diagrammatic format in Appendix 5. 4.13.2 Extensions to the Period of Appointment or Accommodating Special Cases Where a College wishes to continue the appointment of an External Examiner who, in exceptional circumstances, contravenes the general criteria for appointment outlined above in Sections 4.12.2 or 4.12.3, the College must submit justification why the continued appointment is necessary. The request must be routed through the Academic Registry in the first instance, and the documentation supplied will be first scrutinised to examine the basis of the exceptional circumstance or whether the extension of time is permitted. Incomplete or ineligible requests for extension will be returned to the College for further information/re-nomination of an alternate. Completed and valid requests for extension/special circumstances will be examined by the Dean of Academic Board (for extensions up to 5 years) or the Chair of the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee (for all other special cases) who have authority to approve or decline the continued period of appointment or exception to regulations.

Section 4

83

[page left intentionally blank]

84

Section 4

SECTION 5: MONITORING PROGRAMMES

5.1 INTRODUCTION

The University has three mechanisms by which the standards of its programmes and quality of the learning opportunities are monitored: a) module review and programme monitoring, b) obtaining and responding to student feedback and c) involving external examiners in the ongoing review and development of their programmes. On an annual basis, Colleges, through their Boards of Studies are required to review the individual modules that comprise a programme to ensure that the module content and teaching, learning and assessment methods are appropriate for the intended outcomes. They must also monitor student achievement and review curricula content and structure at programme level to ensure that the programme specification is still valid. This is particularly relevant for new programmes. Details of the items to be considered by Boards of Studies and Colleges are listed in Section 5.2. These procedures involve the use of mandatory proformas for recording outcomes of programme monitoring (Web Link 15, Appendix 14) and of reporting from Colleges to the relevant Academic Board (Web Link 16, Appendix 14). Further details of the process are found on the Academic Registrys web-site: http://www.swan.ac.uk/registry/QualityAssuranceandEnhancement/Monitoring/Annua lMonitoringofModulesandProgrammes/ As part of module review/programme monitoring, student feedback should be obtained. The Universitys policy on this matter is found in Section 5.3. Student feedback is also obtained on broader aspects of the learning and teaching environment. Swanseas policy on obtaining and responding to this feedback is in Section 5.3.3. As mentioned in the introduction to Section 4, external examiners have an important role in assuring standards. External examiners are required to report annually on the programme(s) which they examined; Colleges are then required to respond accordingly. The Reports and College responses are considered by the Academic Boards, with institutional issues discussed at the Regulations, Quality and standards committee. This process, as outlined in Section 5.4 forms an important part of the University's quality assurance system. 5.2 PROCEDURE FOR ANNUAL MONITORING OF MODULES AND PROGRAMMES

5.2.1 Summary of Responsibilities Module coordinators are responsible for undertaking annual module review and reporting outcomes to the relevant programme director(s). Suggested proformas for recording module review outcomes are available on the Intranet, see Web Links 13 and 14 (Appendix 14) Programme Directors are responsible for undertaking Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes for all taught programmes of study. Programme Directors shall address all of the areas contained in the Proforma for Annual

Section 5

85

Monitoring of Modules and Programmes (AMMP1 see Web Link 15, Appendix 14)). Programme Directors are responsible for implementing action plans arising from the annual monitoring process. Boards of Studies shall review, refine and approve Annual Monitoring reports (AMMP1 proformas) including the NSS analysis (see web-link 17, Appendix 14 for the NSS proforma) and monitor action plans developed in response on at least an annual basis. Mandatory terms of reference for Boards of Studies are provided on the Intranet. College Learning and Teaching Committees are responsible for producing and approving an executive summary (synopsis) summarising the outcomes of Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes at Boards of Studies (AMMP2 see Web Link 16, Appendix 14). College Learning and Teaching Committees shall outline the student involvement in the process and the nature and extent of any external input into the process. College Learning and Teaching Committees shall identify and respond to College-wide issues raised by its Boards of Studies and monitor the implementation of action plans. The Head of College must sign the synopsis and the Chair of the College Learning and Teaching Committee should raise relevant matters with the College Management Board (or equivalent). The College Learning and Teaching Committee chair shall share feedback received from the Universitys Academic Boards and/or Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee with Programme Directors. The Universitys Academic Boards shall consider the completed Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes synopses at programme and College level (AMMP1 & 2 and College action plans) and the NSS response submitted by College Learning and Teaching Committees. The Boards shall review the evidence, compare its robustness in relation to the issues outlined below, under General principles, and shall identify which Colleges have demonstrated good practice in their procedures/documentation so that this can be effectively disseminated across Colleges. (There shall be liaison with the Universitys Learning and Teaching Committee concerning the NSS analysis). Particular attention shall be made to reports on newly introduced programmes, those subject to a periodic review in previous academic session, those in which there is withdrawal of a subject area/set of related programmes and those identified as at risk in accordance with the Academic Quality Indicators Report (see section 6.4). The Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee (RQSC) shall receive and consider the minutes of the Academic Board as presented by the Dean. The RQSC shall respond to institutional issues, consider and disseminate noteworthy practice and refer matters to other Committees as appropriate and confirm that Colleges have completed their annual monitoring exercise in accordance with the Universitys guidance. The RQSC shall provide feedback to Colleges on the consideration of the outcomes of the Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes process and reflect on the need for revisions to the procedures. The Quality Office, Academic Registry is responsible for auditing the annual monitoring process on a risk based approach with specific reference to the adequacy

86

Section 5

of College action plans and responses to recommendations/action plans associated with programme periodic review, validation and professional body accreditation.

5.2.2 General Principles Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes is a key element of Swansea Universitys procedures for ensuring the effective discharge of its responsibilities for the academic standards of its awards and the quality of learning opportunities provided for students. Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes provides a tool to both facilitate and evaluate enhancement relating to strategic priorities across the institution. Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes may also facilitate opportunities to upgrade existing programmes to a higher level or to identify significant changes to the structure, content or mode of delivery of programmes. Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes also provides a helpful framework for subject areas to formalise existing practice and to offer a formal vehicle for the consideration of external examiners reports/verbal comments, student feedback, and data on admission, progression, assessment results and modular review. It should also encompass issues raised with/by employers, professional bodies, graduates and internal or external reviews. Consequently Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes enables subject areas to provide a holistic view of a programme of study and to assist with the planning of future programme developments. Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes is an integral information source for the periodic review of programmes and action plans arising from AMMP should therefore also inform key discussion during periodic review. Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes includes consideration of new programmes, including the first year of delivery which may or may not have seen completion of the programmes first cohort. Also, it applies to any programmes which are suspended until such time that there are no active student enrolments. Appendix 6 provides a useful diagram to illustrate the relationship between AMMP and Periodic Review (and should they occur, cause for concern College Audits) and the associated action plans. It also outlines the various relationships and reporting lines between committees within the institution. 5.2.3 Purpose The purpose of the Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes Procedure is to: reflect upon, evaluate, update and enhance current programmes and modules,

Section 5

87

using information from students (including data on recruitment, progression, graduation and employment and student feedback), staff and other external sources, including relevant subject standards and the analysis of NSS results. Suggested proformas for analysing outcomes from the NSS Survey are on the intranet (see Web Link 17 Appendix 14) identify practice or innovation worthy of dissemination and to draw to the attention of the institution matters of generic interest or concern. ensure that appropriate action is taken to address shortcomings identified by the College, Institution or External Bodies. Action points must also have an implementation timescale. provide information that enables the institution to demonstrate its confidence in the continuing validity of the programmes and its associated intended learning outcomes. provide information to the College and University on factors, other than curricula issues which are impacting the delivery of the programme (e.g. library, estates, technical resources etc). contribute information that will inform the periodic review of the programmes and decisions regarding the future viability of the programme. Provide assurance that programmes which are being withdrawn are being adequately supported by both administrative and quality assurance processes.

This Procedure and its associated Proformas have been drafted with due consideration of the QAA Code of Practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education including, in particular, appropriate aspects of Section 7: Programme design, approval, monitoring and review September 2006. 5.2.4 Responsibility for Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes Each module has an allocated Module Coordinator who has responsibility for the quality and delivery of the module, including the timely completion of annual module review (see section 5.2.5). Each College is required to undertake Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes for all taught Programmes of Study under its aegis. Each programme of study (including those delivered with collaborative partners) has an allocated Programme Director responsible for the quality and delivery of the programme, including the timely completion of annual monitoring (see section 5.2.5) and periodic review. Particular attention must be placed on newly introduced programmes. Each programme will be allocated to a Board of Study, chaired by the Programme Director. A Board of Study represents all members of staff with a substantial involvement in delivering the programme of study / providing administrative support

88

Section 5

for its delivery, e.g. admissions). (Suggested Terms of Reference for Boards of Studies may be found on the Intranet) The Board of Study will undertake annual monitoring of modules and programmes based upon the approach set out below. 5.2.5 Module Level Review Annual review of modules is initiated by the module coordinator and draws on the experience of those delivering the module, external examiners comments, student feedback, student achievement, current developments in the discipline and in practice. Taking into account the feedback from students and external sources, the module coordinator (in conjunction with the teaching team, where appropriate) should reflect on their module proformas, including placement opportunities and evaluate whether: the intended outcomes were realistic, achieved and appropriate; they should alter the curriculum content (to incorporate research/practice); the delivery method was appropriate; the module should be core/compulsory to a particular programme; any changes are necessary to address the needs of disabled students.

new

Data on student achievement at module level should also be examined and reported upon. This includes the failure rate, mean, minimum and maximum marks. Statistics to support a review of student achievement and to evaluate the appropriateness of assessment approaches are available on the Intranet (termed ARQUE module analysis). The purpose of the analysis is to ensure that marking criteria are being consistently applied, and where variations are found, to promote discussion on possible changes that may be required. A template to assist in interpreting the analysis is provided on the Intranet, see Web Link 14, Appendix 14). Module coordinators in discussion with their teaching team should also then reflect on whether: assessment methods were suitable; grading criteria were successful in distinguishing performance; material and/or assessment methods should be revised, in particular for disabled students.

This process of module review should be documented (see the proforma on the Intranet - Web Link 13, Appendix 14). See Section 5.2.11 for a timetable and Section 5.2.1 for a summary of responsibilities). The module review process should not be seen as little more than carrying out an audit trail to confirm to Programme Directors that review has taken place. Module review provides a set of essential data for programme level monitoring. Completed module review proformas (see Web Link 13, Appendix 14) serve as important evidence that students are meeting the learning outcomes for the programme, and that the learning resources are satisfactory. In addition, module coordinators might

Section 5

89

wish to identify innovation/good practice ideas which other staff might like to introduce on their own modules and initiate feedback to students. As good practice, module review should be completed as soon as possible after the module has been delivered, assessed and the assessment results are available (see Section 5.2.11 for a timetable). Information should be sent to the Programme Director(s) for consideration in programme level annual monitoring. Actions arising from module review should be implemented promptly (see the procedures in the Teaching Quality Manual, Section 3.4 concerning making amendments to modules.) 5.2.6 Jointly Delivered Programmes (Incl. Collaborative Partners) Cognate programmes (e.g. joint subjects) may be grouped and be considered at one Board of Studies. Statistics can be grouped to assist this process by contacting the Statistical Reports Officer in ACU. This may result, in the case of jointly delivered programmes, to Boards of Studies involving staff from a number of different Colleges or external partners. However, programmes will only be allocated to one Board of Study requiring liaison between/reporting to all Colleges concerned to ensure that all relevant staff are involved in discussions concerning proposed changes to programmes or difficulties encountered in programme delivery. 5.2.7 Sources of Data for Annual Monitoring The Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes process will make use of, inter alia, the following sources of information: Essential Programme Specification(s) and Module descriptors (see AMMP4) Critical self-reflection by teaching staff/placement providers Recruitment, Selection and Admissions statistics (see AMMP4) Assessment, Progression and Outcomes Statistics (see AMMP4) External Assessment (including external examiners) Reports Outcomes of Student Feedback Outcomes of the National Survey of Students (for final year undergraduate students not available for taught postgraduate programmes) Annual module level reviews (see ARQUE analysis - AMMP4) Reports from Student/Staff Committees Student Handbooks Prior years Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programme report, in particular the action points Audit, Periodic Review and Professional Body Accreditation Action Plans as appropriate The document AMMP4 is available on the Universitys Intranet, see Web Link 18 (Appendix 14). Recommended

90

Section 5

Discussions from the College Learning and Teaching Committee which are relevant to proposed amendments to the programme or portfolio of modules that comprise the programme. Reports from Quality Assurance activities Reports from study away/work placement away from the institution Reports from the Peer Review of Teaching (where adopted by the College) Minutes of College Examination Boards Results of the Postgraduate Taught Experience survey where available and relevant to the programme) Relevant QAA Subject/Qualification Benchmark statement(s) copies available from www.qaa.ac.uk or the Quality Office, Academic Registry.

Statistical data concerning assessment outcomes at programme level will be provided on the Universitys Intranet by selecting the appropriate tabs listed under the statistics tab under Documents and Information as appropriate. Analysis of assessment results at modular level (ARQUE analysis) shall be posted on the Intranet. Centrally provided statistical data on student progression shall be updated on a quarterly basis by the Administrative Computing Unit unless specific alternative updates have been negotiated. Please contact the Quality Office to discuss programmes with non traditional start and end dates. Employment related statistics (graduate destinations) is also available on the Intranet and is available by the end of July for the previous cohort of graduating students. Statistics on applications and admissions, at subject area level (and where appropriate individual UCAS Codes) is also available on the Admissions Tutors website. Contact the Admissions Office for access and password. 5.2.8 Scope of Reporting Outcomes and Retention of Documentation Programme Directors shall prepare a draft programme monitoring report for consideration and approval by the Board of Studies on an annual basis. An approved and final version of the report shall then be presented to the relevant College Learning and Teaching Committee on the outcomes of the Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes. These reports shall:
(a)

(b) (c)

comment upon action taken as a consequence of the previous Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes Report (or where relevant the periodic review of programmes report PPR1); evaluate changes to admissions and associated policies; evaluate changes to programmes in respect of aims; intended learning outcomes; structure and content; assessment policy and methods of assessment; delivery, teaching methods and staffing 1;

Curricula review should encompass At modular level - an assessment of whether the learning outcomes of the modules are appropriate to the level of module, an assessment of whether current research or practice in the subject is

Section 5

91

(d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l)

evaluate qualifications and outcomes awarded; identify programme issues raised by quality assurance mechanisms; evaluate significant changes to programme regulations and administration; evaluate significant changes to arrangements for providing academic and pastoral support for students; evaluate any changes to Work Experience, Employability Skills and Graduate Employment; evaluate significant changes to programmes arising from external feedback; identify any resource issues relating to the quality of programme delivery; identify any future developments which may impact on the quality of programme delivery; provide an action plan to disseminate good practice and/or address weaknesses.

A mandatory proforma is provided for all taught programmes (AMMP1 - see Web Link 15, Appendix 14). Where periodic review / accreditation visit from a professional body has previously taken place, the relevant action points arising there from must be transposed into and reported upon in the following AMMP proforma until the matter has been resolved. Where relevant, there may be curricula level issues that have arisen following an audit of the College. Such matters should also be discussed. A diagram showing the inter-relationships between the processes of annual monitoring, periodic review and cause for concern audits may be found in Appendix 6. Programme Directors are responsible for implementing actions arising from the annual monitoring process and Boards of Studies should monitor progress (on at least an annual basis). The College Learning and Teaching Committee shall submit an Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes Synopsis (AMMP2 - see Web Link 16, Appendix 14) signed by the Head of College to the Quality Office alongside all AMMP1 documentation and the NSS Analysis. The Colleges synopsis shall effectively constitute a summary of the Reports of Boards of Studies and shall provide:
(a)

A confidence statement outlining: that the College Learning and Teaching Committee has received reports from Boards of Studies; that the College has retained Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programme documentation (see minimum retention period outlined below); a brief description of the process including the role of students and any external involvement.

adequately included within the portfolio of modules, an assessment of whether the intended outcomes have been achieved (i.e. pass rates for the module), an evaluation of whether the assessment methods/grading criteria are suitable to distinguish performance At programme level - an assessment of whether the intended outcomes have been achieved, evaluating the suitability of teaching methods and resources, evaluating whether placement opportunities are suitable for achieving the intended outcomes, Evaluating the structure of the programme and whether it is suitable to deliver the aims and intended outcomes

92

Section 5

(b) (c)

(d)

A College Action Plan. An executive summary of the outcomes of the Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programme in the College commenting upon: the impact of the Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programme upon the College Strategic Plan; the Colleges consideration of any external influences upon programmes; statistical indicators; College issues arising from the Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programme process; institutional issues arising from the Annual Monitoring of Programme process; particular comments on newly introduced programmes (regardless of whether a cohort has completed the programme); noteworthy practice. An account of any future developments in respect of any proposals: for new taught programmes of study (note procedures in Section 2.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual regarding deadlines for considering new proposals); Any proposals to discontinue existing programmes of study; Any proposals to substantially revise existing programmes of study (note procedures in Section 3.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual).

Where the College Learning and Teaching Committee synopses raise matters with major policy or procedural implications, the RQSC will advise the appropriate University Committee. The Academic Board shall consider the completed Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes synopses at programme and College level (AMMP1 & 2), College action plans and the National Student Survey response submitted by College Learning and Teaching Committees. This group shall review the evidence, compare its robustness in relation to the issues outlined below, under General principles, and shall identify which Colleges have demonstrated good practice in their procedures/documentation so that this can be effectively disseminated across the Colleges. Particular attention shall be made to reports on newly introduced programmes. The minutes of the Academic Board will be submitted to the following University Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee for consideration of any cross Academic Board or institutional issues. (There shall be liaison with the Universitys Learning and Teaching Committee concerning the NSS analysis). Particular attention shall be made to reports on newly introduced programmes, those subject to a periodic review in previous academic session, those in which there is withdrawal of a subject area/set of related programmes and those identified as at risk in accordance with the Academic Quality Indicators Report (see section 6.4).

The Universitys Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee shall provide feedback to the Colleges Learning and Teaching Committee Chair following consideration of the Academic Boards report. It shall be incumbent on the College

Section 5

93

L&T Committee Chair to convey this feedback to all programme directors (and thereon to inform all relevant staff and students). Evidence of programme monitoring by Boards of Studies must be retained by Colleges for a period of at least 5 years as it may be subject to audit by the Universitys Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee, by the QAA or other bodies responsible for assuring quality and standards. In order to address any personnel changes it is strongly recommended that annual programme monitoring reports are stored electronically and in the Colleges Administrative Office to facilitate easy retrieval and subsequent review. 5.2.9 Student Involvement and Reporting to Students Student opinion should be sought in annual programme monitoring through consideration of questionnaire feedback, staff-student consultative committee minutes or through inviting them to the Board of Studies meeting. In obtaining student feedback at programme level, students should be asked to comment on the programmes structure, its administration, delivery and support, e.g. timetabling, feedback, handbooks, pastoral arrangements etc. The outcomes of Annual Programme Monitoring and National Student Survey responses should be made available to students in accordance with the Universitys policy on student feedback (see Section 5.3 of the Teaching Quality Manual). This could involve publishing the completed proforma and/or advising the next StaffStudent Consultative Committee of the key monitoring outcomes and action plan. 5.2.10 Approving Changes to a Programme/Module As a consequence of completing the College synopsis, College Learning and Teaching Committee chairs are reminded about the following University procedures concerning amending/withdrawing modules or programmes.
(a)

Minor changes to individual modules or to the intended learning outcomes of the programme should be updated via the Swansea University Intranet, which shall hold the central record of the programme specification and the modules. Major changes to the programme, should they be required, should be submitted to the Administrative Officer, Academic Registry, who will submit the relevant updated programme specification and any related to documents to the relevant Academic Board which shall review and approve (or decline) the proposed changes, including deciding on whether a full re-validation event is necessary.

(b)

For further details on the level of autonomy that Colleges have in making changes, see the policy on amending programme specifications (Section 3.2.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual) and also the related procedures for making other changes to a programme (Section 3.2.3 of the Manual). Should there be a decision to withdraw a programme, the appropriate procedures in Section 3.3 of the Teaching Quality Manual must be followed.

94

Section 5

5.2.11 Process/Timetable On an annual basis the Programme Director is required to convene a meeting of the Board of Studies (all members of staff with a substantial involvement in delivering the programme of study, e.g. module coordinators / providing administrative support for its delivery, e.g. admissions). The Board of Studies shall use as one of its sources of information module level reviews, which have been undertaken by module coordinators. Ideally, the Board of Studies meeting which undertakes annual programme monitoring should be held as soon as possible after the Examination Board for the particular programme(s) of study with due recognition that external examiners written reports may not always be available at this time. (Colleges may wish to combine such activities to ensure external input into the monitoring process, but with due consideration that centrally provided data concerning student progression and completion may not be available at this time.) Boards of Studies are required to carry out the monitoring on an annual cycle. Boards of Studies must submit their Annual Monitoring of Programme for taught programmes of study to their College Learning and Teaching Committee according to the following timetable: For undergraduate programmes with a June completion or earlier of final component by September 30th of the same year (or nearest working day) data will be supplied in aggregated form following the June University Examination Boards and July University Progression Boards.) For undergraduate programmes with a post-June completion of final component Contact the Quality Office directly to discuss appropriate time frames. For postgraduate programmes by January 15th of the year following the holding of the University Part Two Examination Board. (This will enable an overall report based on both Part One and Part Two and submission of the External Examiners reports. It should be noted however that internal module review and any actions therefrom must be conducted following the Part One Examination Boards).

This then will enable Colleges to comply with the following mandatory timetable: Colleges are required to submit their synopses to the Quality Office, Academic Registry according to the following timetable: For Undergraduate programmes* 31st October following the academic session to which the monitoring refers. For Postgraduate Programmes 31st January following the consideration of Part Two results.

* Alternative deadlines have been agreed directly with the College of Human and Health Sciences for programmes with non-traditional delivery patterns. Other

Section 5

95

Colleges with programmes of this nature should contact the Quality Office directly to discuss more appropriate completion cycles.

96

Section 5

5.2.12 Summary of Process and Timescales Swansea Universitys Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes procedure is divided into four sequential processes as set out below:
Task Annual review of individual modules, including reflection on student feedback MODULE LEVEL REFLECTION Timescale This activity needs to be completed immediately after the end of the academic year/teaching block when assessment outcomes are available to ensure any changes are made in module descriptors for the following year. Normally to be completed by July Timescale To be carried out throughout the year to fit in with end of completion of part/year of programme. Standard reports for UG and PG to be approved by College Learning and Teaching and College synopses to be submitted to the Academic Registry by st October 31 for Undergraduate and Postgraduate programmes Timescale Responsibility Carried out by module lecturers and reflection reported to those involved in Programme level monitoring (suggested proformas under Web Link 13, Appendix 14)

Task Monitoring of all aspects of programmes against a series of criteria set University-wide

Responsibility Programme Director (with Board of Study) carries out the monitoring. Responsibility of the Colleges Learning and Teaching Chair to ensure process happens and for College L&T Ctte to confirm the process and the action plan produced. Programme Director to oversee implementation of action plan Responsibility Academic Board responsible for assurance that process took place, to identify institutional issues Responsibility

PROGRAMME/ COLLEGE LEVEL ANNUAL MONITORING

Task

Academic Board By end of Michaelmas term confirms that Academic Board Programme level annual monitoring has taken place Task Reviews reports from Academic Board to consider institutional issues and refer matters, where appropriate to other University Officers/committees. Timescale

UNIVERSITY LEVEL ASSURANCE

Completed by the end of RQSC responsible for the following academic year feedback to Colleges on at the latest. institutional issues

Section 5

97

Example:

Timescale for Annual Review of Academic Year A

ACADEMIC YEAR A

ACADEMIC YEAR B

July deadline for Module Review Year A.

Oct 31st deadline for UG College Synopsis (AMMP1 + 2 and NSS Synopsis) to go to Academic Registry.

December Academic Board to report to RSQC

Jan 31st deadline for PG College Synopsis (AMMP1 + 2 and NSS Synopsis) to go to Academic Registry.

November Deadline for Academic Board (UG) to review UG AMMP submissions.

January RSQC to discuss Deans report

March Deadline for Academic Board (PGTM) to review PG AMMP submissions

June RSQC to consider UG and PGTM reports on AMMP and to review procedures.

98

Section 5

5.3

POLICY ON STUDENT FEEDBACK

5.3.1 Introduction The University constantly reviews the structure of its degrees, the content of its modules and the application of its rules and regulations. It does this to improve the provision it offers to students. Comments of the external examiners, which are received on an annual basis, are the main focus of such reviews but as important are the views of students. In accordance with the Student Partnership and Engagement Strategy, students are invited to comment on their academic experiences at Swansea in a variety of ways: At modular level (feeding into the annual monitoring of modules and programmes) At programme level through reviews of the programme internally or by professional bodies or re-validation events. Through the College by means of a student-staff consultative committee at which the views and concerns of students are heard in a more formal setting or through periodic programme reviews . At University level student representatives serve on key University committees, such as the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee, The Learning and Teaching Committee, Student Affairs Committee and Academic Boards, and are invited to raise issues on behalf of students. Furthermore, an annual survey is conducted jointly by the University and the Students Union (the Student Satisfaction Survey) for students pursuing Level One and Level Two of Undergraduate Degree programmes and for final year undergraduate students the National Student Survey provides an opportunity for further feedback. For students pursuing Taught Postgraduate programmes, the Higher Education Academy, Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey (PTES) provides an opportunity for students feedback. Institutionally, student feedback is monitored by the Learning and Teaching Committee. The following sections outline the University policy on gaining and responding to student feedback at modular level and on institutional issues. 5.3.2 Student Feedback at Module and Programme Level All Colleges shall include student feedback in the annual review of all modules and in the cycle of review of programmes of study. Colleges shall be permitted to develop their own feedback process and proforma to reflect the needs of their own disciplines. The Learning and Teaching Committee shall, however, review the appropriateness of these from time to time, and shall also provide examples of current best practice across disciplines. (During the 2010-11 session a working party of the Learning and Teaching Committee will be drafting a proposal for a universal module feedback proforma.) Colleges shall be encouraged to publish the results of the annual survey to its students in an appropriate form. This may involve a means of preserving the

Section 5

99

anonymity of staff and students, but Colleges will be encouraged to make the process as transparent as possible. 5.3.3 Institutional Policy on Student Feedback 1) All administrative departments and academic Colleges are required to obtain the feedback from their client base to assure the standards and enhance the quality of provision. Academic Colleges are required to obtain student feedback on academic provision at module level (see Section 5.3.2 of the Universitys Teaching Quality Manual). Similarly, administrative departments whose client base includes students should also obtain feedback on their services. 2) The feedback mechanisms used by both academic Colleges and administrative departments should be open and transparent, with students advised of the results and intended responses to issues of concern. 3) The Student Affairs Committee and the Learning and Teaching Committee shall receive extracts of minutes from other Committees responsible for monitoring student feedback, e.g. the LIS Satisfaction Survey. 4) To provide a cross-institutional approach, the Students Union shall initiate, in consultation with and supported by the University, a formal survey each year to obtain feedback from students on a range of general issues related to learning and teaching. This will include academic and tutorial guidance, support and supervision, quality of teaching, range of learning and teaching methods, feedback to assignments, quality of learning resources, suitability of teaching accommodation, facilities and equipment and quality of pastoral support. The Survey shall also seek feedback on specific matters related to programme structure and delivery to support Colleges in undertaking regular reviews of their provision. The institutional survey shall have the following characteristics: a) All taught students, regardless of mode of study or location of study shall be involved in the survey to ensure that the results are representative of the academic disciplines of the University and the diversity of the student body. b) Survey results shall be disaggregated to a variety of levels to serve relevant management information needs. Students will be asked to declare their level of study (or year of study for postgraduate students), degree programme, full or part-time mode of study, mature-age entrants etc to enable issues to be appropriately analysed. To preserve the anonymity of students, where student numbers enrolled on a specific programme or in a department is small, results may be aggregated to College level. c) The results of the annual survey on general learning and teaching issues shall be published internally, but not externally. Results shall inform the development of the Universitys Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy and other strategies with related learning and teaching impacts, e.g. Widening Access, ICT, and Estates.

100

Section 5

d) Results at programme level shall be referred to the College concerned for consideration. 5) The Learning and Teaching Committee shall consider the results of the formal survey, the National Student Survey and any other student satisfaction survey where they pertain to general learning and teaching issues. The Student Affairs Committee shall consider primarily non-academic matters. Specific matters for concern shall be referred to appropriate individuals or committees for formal response where necessary. The Learning and Teaching Committee shall be responsible for monitoring actions to ensure that quality enhancement is being undertaken. Colleges are required to provide a written response to their National Student Survey results in conjunction with the AMMP process. The Learning and Teaching Committee shall monitor the receipt and content of these responses. A response proforma is available on the Intranet (see Web Link 17, Appendix 14). 6) Student feedback and involvement in decision-making is promoted via a number of mechanisms: via mandatory Staff-Student Committees, the Students Union organised Course Representatives Forum and through participation of Students Union sabbatical officers and student representatives on a range of Universitylevel committees, in particular the Student Affairs Committee. The Learning and Teaching Committee shall have a primary role in assuring the quality of the student learning experience. 5.3.4 Practical approaches to obtaining feedback At its meeting of 17 January 2007, the Learning and Teaching Committee adopted the following recommendations made in regard to obtaining feedback: 2
(c) (d) (e) (f)

To use Blackboard for academic purposes at a programme level but to retain paper-based questionnaires to review at a modular level. To develop a questionnaire proforma to be used as a standard starting point for surveys. To ensure that efforts be made to complete the survey lifecycle by feeding results/actions back to all respondents. To ensure compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act when developing and administering user surveys.

During the 2010-11 session a working party of the Learning and Teaching Committee will be drafting a proposal for a universal module feedback proforma.

Section 5

101

5.4

EXTERNAL EXAMINERS REPORTS

5.4.1 Introduction This section outlines the procedures for processing external examiners' reports. It outlines that the primary responsibility for quality assurance and control lies with Colleges and the Academic Board and also sets the deadlines for various actions. The procedures outlined apply to all undergraduate and taught Masters programmes of study and to all Swansea University, franchised/validated programmes, e.g. HND which is jointly validated with Edexel. 5.4.2 Aims and Objectives To ensure that the reports of external examiners are considered thoroughly by Colleges and by the University. To provide an infrastructure to enable the University and Colleges to respond to issues of concern. To provide feedback to External Examiners in terms of the University or College response to their reports recommendations. To provide a mechanism for disseminating good practice across Colleges and the University as a whole. The ultimate aim is to ensure that the students' learning experience is continually enhanced and improved.

5.4.3 Responsibilities External Examiners External Examiners are required to prepare, on an annual basis, a report on the College provision for which they are responsible for overseeing. Swansea University regulations requires that these reports be submitted within six weeks of the Examining Board (for those held in June, i.e. by 31 July), or one month after the Examining Board. This requirement is outlined in the Guidance Booklet sent to each external examiner by the Academic Registry. (See also Section 4.12 of this manual for the full responsibilities of External Examiners). External Examiners receive an acknowledgement of the actions taken by the College and/or University in response to their Reports recommendations. This is the responsibility of the Academic Registrar, noted below. Reports should be sufficiently detailed, addressing each of the items raised in the Report Form template. Where a report is deemed to be lacking in detail, it may be referred back to the External Examiner for revision. Failure to submit reports or situations of unsatisfactory performance can lead to an informal warning or the premature termination of an External Examiners contract.

102

Section 5

Academic Registry The Academic Registrar is responsible for receiving and circulating copies of all External Examiners' reports to the following persons: The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Student Experience) - Chair of Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee Deputy Academic Registrar The relevant Head of College or nominee Chair of the College Learning and Teaching Committee Principal of the relevant collaborative partner institution (where appropriate) The Administrative Officer of the relevant Academic Board

The Academic Registrar is also responsible for servicing the various University quality committees to which the reports (and/or issues arising from them) are referred and in monitoring the administrative process. In this regard a checklist is maintained recording: receipt of the reports; the circulation of the reports; receipt of the College response form (including input from the collaborative partner where appropriate);

The Deputy Academic Registrar reviews all External Examiners reports and may, where necessary, refer an issue to the appropriate committee for immediate resolution, e.g. to the RQSC if the matter pertains to the academic regulations or other institutional concerns. The Academic Registry is responsible, in consultation with the Dean of the Academic Board, for providing feedback to the External Examiner on the actions taken by the College or Swansea University to comments made in the report. Feedback is normally provided only after the Academic Board has considered the report and normally consists of a copy of the College Response Form. However, normally the College would keep their External Examiners informed of developments. The Secretary of the RQSC is responsible for conveying the discussions of the RQSC regarding the External Examiners reports to the relevant Administrative Officers for information and for facilitating the dissemination of good practice through the Swansea Academy for Learning and Teaching. A digest is prepared by the Deputy Academic Registrar to indicate the institutional response to issues that arose during the consideration of External Examiners reports, including the identification of best practice. This digest is circulated for information to all External Examiners, internal examination officers, Chairs of College Learning and Teaching Committees and to the Universitys RQSC. A version is also made available on the Quality Office web pages and issues of good practice are promulgated via the Swansea Academy of Learning and Teaching. The Academic Registrar is also responsible for ensuring that the Swansea University Regulations and Guide for External Examiners address the principles and precepts
Section 5 103

of the Quality Assurance Agencys Code of Practice (revised version published in August 2004). Academic Colleges Colleges are required to consider the reports of their External Examiners and to identify issues of concern distinguishing between issues relevant to the College and to the University as a whole. The Head of College must ensure that the College addresses any issues of concern promptly and that a relevant course of action is agreed. Where the issue relates to a particular module, then the Head of College must ensure that this is communicated to the module coordinator and that necessary changes are acted upon. Where collaborative programmes are involved, the Head of College is responsible for ensuring that the collaborative partner has also responded appropriately to issues raised and including this information in the College Response Form. The Head of College must submit a short report outlining the action which has been taken arising from the External Examiners report (a proforma is available from the Academic Registry - please see Web Link 19, Appendix 14). This report is forwarded to the Academic Registrar who is responsible for circulating the report to the appropriate Academic Board. Colleges should be aware that their responses are circulated by the Academic Registry to External Examiners. Colleges are reminded that, in accordance with the procedures for annual monitoring of modules and programmes, the Colleges Learning and Teaching Committee is required to consider the reports of External Examiners when reviewing modules and programmes of study. (Please refer to Sections 5.2 and 6.2 of this Manual). Dean and Academic Boards The Academic Boards have a Quality Assurance role in that one of their functions is to consider External Examiners reports and ensure appropriate responses are made. The Academic Boards receive a copy of the reports of External Examiners from the Colleges (according to whether they related to undergraduate or postgraduate programmes) by the Administrative Officer, Academic Registry. In addition, members receive a short report from each Head of College outlining the action that has been taken, arising from the External Examiners reports. It is the responsibility of the Academic Boards to ensure that Colleges have considered the reports and, if any adverse comments have been made on practices within a College, which the College(s) concerned has addressed such issues. The Academic Board also identifies examples of good practice and highlights any issues that need to be addressed by the College or to be referred to the Learning and Teaching Committee, i.e. issues that are the University's concern.

104

Section 5

If the Academic Board finds evidence that Colleges have not addressed issues raised by the External Examiners, the Dean is required to report to the Pro-ViceChancellor (Student Experience). The Dean and the Administrative Officer provide the RQSC with a report of the deliberations of the Academic Board. The report highlights issues of concern affecting the University, must confirm whether Colleges have responded to the comments of the External Examiners and also highlights examples of good practice. University Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee The RQSC has a Quality Control function. It considers the reports of the Deans and ensures that Colleges have addressed issues raised by External Examiners. It ensures that institutional issues raised by External Examiners have been dealt with, either by other Committees or individuals, or within its own discussions. The Chair (Pro Vice-Chancellor Student Experience) and Deputy Academic Registrar receive all External Examiners' reports and might raise any issue arising from them at the appropriate meeting(s) of relevant Committees or to administrators, e.g. the Universitys Examination Officer for action. The RQSC scrutinises the reports of the Award Boards to determine if any issues have a broader University-wide concern and might advise External Examiners of any action that the University will be taking regarding these issues. (The Secretary of the RQSC informs the Administrative Officer and Deputy Academic Registrar of these comments). The other important role of the RQSC is to identify examples of good practice and disseminate them within the University. This will be undertaken by an Administrative Officer of the Academic Registry in conjunction with SALT. 5.4.4 Deadlines for External Examiners Reports Each function outlined is carried out within a certain timescale (normally no more than five calendar months) and Colleges, Chairs of Committees, and respective Committee Secretaries should ensure that the deadlines outlined below are met. (It is acknowledged that this timetable is only relevant to those programmes which follow the traditional pattern of tuition, i.e. September-June.) Receipt of External Examiners' reports Reports circulated College Committees to consider reports and to address issues of concern, etc. Heads of Colleges to prepare a short report Academic Boards to consider reports Academic Boards reports to RQSC Dissemination of good practice by 31 July on Receipt by start of term by October meeting of Academic Board during October meetings at November meeting by end of Michaelmas Term

Section 5

105

Initial Response to External Examiners

by end Term

of

Michaelmas

Issues Specific to Examiners of Taught Postgraduate Programmes Examiners of taught postgraduate programmes will complete a single report form, using the template issued by the Academic Registry by December 15th. The report should therefore cover issues related to the quality and standards of both the taught modular and dissertation elements of the programme. (External examiners of taught postgraduate programmes are expected to communicate any concerns about the part 1 element of the programme to the programme staff following the part 1 examination board so that any actions required can be introduced prior to the module being taught again. These comments can then be incorporated into the annual written report prepared by the examiner which should be submitted to the University by December 15th.) External Examiners shall only act as moderators and therefore should not be second marking dissertations or other pieces of work submitted for Part 2 (see Sections 4.6 of this manual concerning double marking and 4.11 (iv) concerning regulations for external examining). The single report form is therefore normally expected in December following the submission and examination of part 2 work. The internal quality procedures outlined above concerning College response and Academic Board oversight will apply as for undergraduate programmes.

5.4.5 Content of the Report The Report Form template (available electronically from the Academic Registry) states the specific issues upon which External Examiners are expected to comment upon. Reports should be sufficiently detailed, addressing each of the items raised in the Report Form template. Where a report is deemed to be lacking in detail, it may be referred back to the External Examiner for revision. 5.4.6 Action to be taken urgently The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Student Experience) and the Deputy Academic Registrar receive copies of the External Examiners' reports. If their attention is drawn to any issue of concern which requires urgent action the issue can be dealt with outside the Committee structure, but must involve the College and other relevant staff. Reports on the action taken, if any, shall be provided to the RQSC as appropriate. 5.4.7 Sensitive Issues If the External Examiner wishes to raise a sensitive or confidential issue he/she may write directly to the Vice Chancellor of Swansea University.

106

Section 5

5.4.8 Programmes with Irregular Start/End Dates Some programmes within Swansea University (e.g. Taught Masters/ Nursing degrees) have irregular start and end dates. Consequently some External Examiners' reports are received during the academic year (as opposed to July). As a result the specific deadlines outlined above are not relevant, however the full process should normally be completed within five calendar months. Additionally, the process and responsibilities outlined above must be followed and Academic Boards and the RQSC must be involved at relevant stages of the process. 5.4.9 The Process, in Outline The flow chart in Appendix 7 summarises the process for dealing with External Examiners' Reports giving deadlines as appropriate. 5.4.10 Conclusion The external examining system is one of the main tools for the University to ensure that standards within Colleges, Faculties and the Institution as a whole are maintained and are comparable with those in other institutions in the UK. It is incumbent on the University to respond to comments positively and promptly. Ultimately the process has been designed to ensure that the students' learning experience is of the highest quality at all times by eliminating problems quickly and improving procedures by disseminating good practice. By so doing the University aims to ensure that Swansea's provision is of the highest standard possible at all times.

Section 5

107

[page left intentionally blank]

108

Section 5

SECTION 6: MAINTAINING STANDARDS AND ENHANCING QUALITY

6.1 OVERVIEW

The University uses three main mechanisms to ensure that standards have been maintained and to identify areas where learning and teaching quality could be enhanced, namely a) programme review, b) professional body reviews/ external quality reviews and c) enhancement reviews. On an annual basis, the Universitys Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee reviews a suite of key quality indicators (see section 6.4) which might indicate opportunities for further engagement and enhancement with subject areas or, in extreme situations, might necessitate a cause for concern review. Comprehensive programme review is the responsibility of the College and should occur at least every five years according to a timetable specified by the Universitys RQSC (see Appendix 13). Procedures for programme review were re-evaluated in 2005/06 and this Manual contains the amended process which involves the establishment of a Review Panel consisting of internal members plus an external assessor. Procedures have also been fine-tuned in light of the QAA Institutional Review in 2008. The review includes examining student achievement data, adequacy of resources and other issues as outlined in Section 6.2. Programme reviews and actions arising from them, are monitored by Academic Board with institutional issues forwarded to the RQSC. Section 6.3 indicates how external reports on subject provision from the Professional Bodies/other external quality bodies receive institutional consideration. The annual oversight of key academic quality indicators at subject level are outlined in section 6.4 and Section 6.5 provides an overall statement on how the University involves relevant external expertise in assuring and enhancing quality and in maintaining standards. Procedures for conducting enhancement reviews are in Section 6.6. All procedures in this section of the Manual have been evaluated against the revised Section 7: Programme Approval, Monitoring and Review of the QAA's Code of Practice.

Section 6

109

6.2

PROCEDURE FOR PERIODIC PROGRAMME REVIEW

6.2.1 Summary of Responsibilities (i) Programme Directors are responsible for undertaking Periodic Programme Review for all taught programmes of study under their remit. Programme Directors shall address all of the areas contained in the Proforma for Periodic Programme Review (PPR1 - see Web Link 20, Appendix 15). Programme Directors are responsible for implementing action plans and satisfying conditions arising from the periodic review process. Programme Directors will be asked to nominate external assessors suitably qualified to participate in the periodic programme review process. The Board of Studies will be convened to review, refine and approve Periodic Review reports (PPR1 proformas) and to provide information for a specific Programme Review Panel (see below). The Board of Studies shall monitor action plans developed in response to periodic reviews on at least an annual basis by ensuring that such recommendations are addressed within the annual monitoring process. A Programme Review Panel shall be convened on behalf of the Universitys Academic Board, consisting of a Dean, Associate Dean or senior academic of another College (not from the College under review), two academic staff members also not from the College under review, at least one external assessor (see below), students and professional body representatives (where appropriate and desired). Administrative support for the Programme Review Panel shall also be provided, including the provision of central statistical information. The Panel shall conduct a review of the programme(s) using information supplied by the Board of Studies in both written and oral form and also information from students and employers (as appropriate). The Academic Registry shall appoint, based on nominations provided by the College, external assessor(s) whose role it shall be to participate in the Periodic Programme Review process and ensure that the continuing programme remains consistent with external standards, i.e. professional body requirements/subject benchmarks, qualifications frameworks and has appropriate teaching and assessment methods. There shall be liaison, where appropriate, with the professional/statutory body to strive to undertake joint review/re-accreditation events. The relevant Academic Board is responsible for receiving a report on the outcome of the periodic programme review process and for ensuring that Boards of Studies respond to the recommendations. College recommendations are to be incorporated into the Action Plans developed as a consequence of the annual programme monitoring process. The Academic Registry shall ensure that action points are addressed and, where necessary, have been incorporated into forthcoming action plans for annual monitoring. The Review Panel Chair will be asked to attend Academic Board to present the report and to clarify any questions. The programme

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

(v)

110

Section 6

director of the programmes reviewed must also attend when the review report is discussed. The Academic Board shall report to the Universitys Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee to confirm its review and to identify any institutional recommendations. (vi) The Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee is empowered to receive further reports from the Academic Board on its oversight of the periodic review process. The RQSC shall consider and respond to institutional issues. An Illustration of the Periodic Review Reporting Pathways

Periodic Programme Review

For Action

College Engagement
For Action

Academic Board
Reported for Information Reported for Information

University Regulations, Standards and Quality Committee

Section 6

111

6.2.2 General Principles (i) Periodic Programme Review is a key element of the Swansea University procedures for ensuring the effective discharge of its responsibilities for the academic standards of its awards and the quality of learning opportunities provided for students. Periodic Programme Review builds on the Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes and relies on those reports as an important source of information. An illustration of the 5 year cycle of AMMP and Periodic Review.

(ii)

AMMP

AMMP PPR1 Report Periodic Review Visit

AMMP

AMMP
Issues arising as a result of Periodic Review will feed back into the coming sessions AMMP Action Plan.

(iii)

Periodic Programme Review is expected to facilitate opportunities to upgrade existing programmes to a higher level or to identify significant changes to the structure, content or mode of delivery of programmes, where appropriate. Periodic Programme Review may inform a Colleges Business Plan concerning its academic provision and also highlight institutional level issues. Periodic Programme Review applies to ALL programmes and this is likely to include newly introduced programmes where cohorts have yet to graduate. Programmes subject to professional/statutory body accreditation are NOT exempt from the periodic review process, but due consideration shall be taken regarding the timing of reviews and the possibility of combining review processes.

(iv)

(v)

(vi)

112

Section 6

(vii)

Each programme which is active will be subject to periodic review every five years.

6.2.3 Revalidation/Failure to Comply with Procedures (i) The Programme Review Panel will be expected within its report to identify relevant conditions and recommendations regarding the programmes continuation. Failure to undergo periodic review or act on conditions in a timely and appropriate manner may result in the programme(s) having to undergo a full re-validation process. All programmes successfully completing the periodic review process will be deemed to have been re-validated until the next periodic review event.

(ii)

(iii)

6.2.4 Purpose (i) The purpose of the Periodic Programme Review procedure is to: a) Ensure that the programme(s) aims, outcomes, curricula structure, teaching, learning and assessment methods remain valid, current and appropriate in the light of external subject standards, the QAAs Academic Infrastructure and appropriate statistical analysis of data derived from but not limited to the annual monitoring process. b) identify practice or innovation worthy of dissemination and to draw to the attention of the institution matters of generic interest or concern. c) ensure that appropriate action is taken to address shortcomings identified by the College, University or External Bodies. Action points must also have an implementation timescale. d) provide information that enables the institution to demonstrate its confidence in the continuing validity of the programmes and its associated intended learning outcomes. e) provide information to the College and University on factors, other than curricula issues which are impacting the delivery of the programme (e.g. library, estates, technical resources etc). f) This Procedure and its associated Proformas have been drafted with due consideration of the QAA Code of Practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education including, in particular, appropriate aspects of Section 7: Programme design, approval, monitoring and review September 2006.

Section 6

113

6.2.5 Responsibility for Periodic Programme Review (i) Each College is required to undertake Periodic Programme Review for all taught Programmes of Study under its aegis. Each programme of study (including those delivered with collaborative partners) has an allocated Programme Director responsible for the quality and delivery of the programme, including periodic review. Particular attention must be placed on newly introduced programmes. Each programme will be allocated to a Board of Study, chaired by a Programme Director. A Board of Study represents all members of staff with a substantial involvement in delivering the programme of study / providing administrative support for its delivery, e.g. admissions. The Board of Study will undertake periodic programme review based upon the approach set out below.

(ii)

(iii)

6.2.6 Jointly Delivered Programmes (Incl. Collaborative Partners) (i) Cognate programmes (e.g. joint subjects) may be grouped and be considered at one Board of Studies. This may result, in the case of jointly delivered programmes, to Boards of Studies involving staff from a number of different Colleges or external partners. However, programmes will only be allocated to one Board of Study requiring liaison between/reporting to all Colleges concerned to ensure that all relevant staff are involved in discussions concerning proposed changes to programmes or difficulties encountered in programme delivery.

(ii)

6.2.7 Sources of Data for Periodic Review (i) The Periodic Programme Review process will make use of, inter alia, the following sources of information:

Essential Completed Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes Reports (AMMP1 proformas or equivalent for the previous 4 years) Programme Specification(s) and Module descriptors (see AMMP4) Critical self-reflection by teaching staff/placement providers Recruitment, Selection and Admissions statistics (see AMMP4) Assessment, Progression and Outcomes Statistics (see AMMP4) External Assessment (including external examiners) Reports Curriculum Map (mapping programme outcomes against the modules) Outcomes of Programme Specific Student Feedback Reports from Student/Staff Committees relating to the programme Student Handbooks Comment on progress in addressing previous periodic review recommendations and action plans

114

Section 6

Recommended Discussions from the College Learning and Teaching Committee/Award Board that are relevant to proposed amendments to the programme or portfolio of modules that comprise the programme. Reports from Quality Assurance activities Reports from study away/work placement away from the institution Reports from the Peer Review of Teaching (where adopted by the College) Minutes of College Examination Boards National Student Survey and/or Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey Results Relevant QAA Subject/Qualification Benchmark statement(s) copies available from www.qaa.ac.uk or the Quality Office, Academic Registry. (ii) Much of this data shall be supplied to Colleges for the five year period in question, however staff are advised that statistical data concerning assessment outcomes at programme level are available on the Universitys Intranet by selecting Schemes Aggregated or Schemes - individual under the undergraduate and taught postgraduate options. Centrally provided statistical data on student progression shall be updated on a quarterly basis by the Information Services and Systems. Employment related statistics (graduate destinations) is also available on the Intranet and is normally available by July for the previous cohort of graduating students. Statistics on applications and admissions, at subject area level is also available on the Admissions Tutors website. Contact the Admissions Office for passwords.

(iii)

(iv)

(v)

6.2.8 Nomination and Role of the External Assessor (i) Principles for the appointment of an External Assessor are set out in PPR3a (see Web Link 21, Appendix 15) with a specific nomination form to be completed (PPR3b see Web Link 22, Appendix 14). Current or recent external examiners will not be permitted. The external assessor shall submit a report (PPR4 Web Link 23, Appendix 14) outlining their recommendations following their consideration of the draft periodic programme review proforma and the Review Panel meeting. The number of assessors selected shall reflect the breadth and variation of the provision under review, upon recommendation from the College representatives. The external assessors role is to critically evaluate whether the programmes aims and intended outcomes are valid, current and appropriate in light of subject benchmarks, other external subject standards
115

(ii)

(iii)

Section 6

(e.g. professional body requirements where appropriate) and the qualifications framework. The external assessor will also be asked to comment on the integrity and cohesiveness of the programme in light of its title and aims. The design and viability of the programme may be examined in the light of student recruitment, progression and employability data. 6.2.9 Information for the Periodic Programme Review Panel A completed draft Periodic Programme Review proforma (PPR1 see Web Link 20, Appendix 14) Curriculum Map for at least core/compulsory modules for the programmes under scrutiny (included in the above proforma) Prior programme review report Programme specification(s) for the relevant programmes under scrutiny Module synopses (can be printed from the Intranet) Student Handbook(s) Subject benchmark Detailed comments from the external assessor (if s/he is not present at the Panel meeting). The material shall be collated and distributed by the Academic Registry staff member providing administrative support to the panel. 6.2.10 Review Panel Meeting Schedules (i) The material is required at the Academic Registry at least one month prior to the scheduled Review Panel meeting. Review Panel members must send questions or concerns to the Academic Registry staff member at least 2 weeks prior to the meeting so that any additional information requests can be forwarded to the College and responses thereon to the Panel. Panel members shall meet the day before the Review Panel meeting to finalise lines of enquiry and Panel members responsibilities for asking different questions. The Panel reserve the right to review raw data as listed above in Section 6.2.7 and to request additional supporting documentation as appropriate.

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

116

Section 6

(v)

The Review Panel shall meet with members of the Board(s) of Studies responsible for the programmes under scrutiny during a one day visit. A typical schedule for the Programme Review Panel meeting is as follows: 9.30 10.00 a.m. Review Panel meets (in private)

10.00 10.45 a.m. Meeting with the Head of College and senior staff in College to indicate position of subject area within the Colleges strategic direction 10.45 12.00 p.m. Meeting with members of the Boards of Studies 12.00 12.30 p.m. Review Panel to conclude its findings 12.30 1.30 p.m. 1.30 2.00 p.m. Lunch time meeting with students Review Panel to conclude its findings and determine further questions Follow-up meeting with staff Review Panel meets (in private) to agree recommendations Review Panel meets with Programme Director (s), Chair of Colleges Learning and Teaching Committee to review findings, agree a final version of the PPR1 proforma and set deadlines for any conditions

2.00 3.00 p.m. 3.00 - 4.00 p.m.

4.30 - 5.00 p.m.

6.2.11 Constitution of the Programme Review Panel Dean, Associate Dean or senior academic staff member from another College (Chair of Panel). (The Chair will be asked to attend the relevant Academic Board meeting to present the report) At least one External Assessor (not the current or most recent external examiner) Two members (not from the College under review) Students Professional Body Representative (if appropriate) Academic Registry nominee (administrative support and record keeping)

6.2.12 Scope of Reporting Outcomes and Retention of Documentation (i) Programme Directors shall prepare a draft periodic programme review report (PPR1) for consideration, review and approval by the Programme Review Panel according to the timetable set by the Learning and Teaching Committee. The Programme Review Panel shall, following its deliberations decide upon final recommendations for the future of the programme(s) and identify how, if at all, the programme review proforma (PPR1) should be
117

Section 6

amended. An approved and final version of the proforma shall then be received by the relevant College Learning and Teaching Committee. These reports shall: a) b) c) Comment upon action taken as a consequence of the previous Periodic Review Report Evaluate changes to admissions and associated policies Evaluate changes to programmes in respect of aims; intended learning outcomes; structure and content; assessment policy and methods of assessment; delivery, teaching methods and staffing 1 Evaluate qualifications and outcomes awarded Identify programme issues raised by quality assurance mechanisms Evaluate significant changes to programme regulations and administration Evaluate significant changes to arrangements for providing academic and pastoral support for students Evaluate any changes to Work Experience, Employability Skills and Graduate Employment Evaluate significant changes to programmes arising from external feedback Identify any resource issues relating to the quality of programme delivery Identify any future developments which may impact on the quality of programme delivery. Provide an action plan to disseminate good practice and/or address weaknesses

d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) l)

(ii)

A mandatory proforma is provided for all taught programmes (PPR1 see Web Link 20, Appendix 14). Programme Directors are responsible for implementing recommendations in the form of action plans arising from the periodic programme review process and Boards of Studies should monitor progress (on an annual basis). Recommendations should be addressed via the annual monitoring exercise and should be included in the AMMP1 form until the matter has been resolved. The College Learning and Teaching Committee shall ensure that the Boards of Studies are implementing the action plan in an appropriate and timely manner and also to respond to College level issues. Such issues should be included in the College Action Plan which is developed as part of the Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes Process (AMMP - see Section 5.2 of this Manual).

(iii)

(iv)

Page: 118 Curricula review should encompass At programme level - an assessment of whether the intended outcomes have been achieved, evaluating the suitability of teaching methods and resources, evaluating whether placement opportunities are suitable for achieving the intended outcomes, Evaluating the structure of the programme and whether it is suitable to deliver the aims and intended outcomes

118

Section 6

Appendix 6 provides a useful diagram to illustrate the relationship between AMMP, Periodic Review and the proposed cause for concern audits and the associated action plans. It also outlines the various relationships and reporting lines between committees within the institution. (v) The Academic Board shall receive the report of the periodic review. Academic Board is responsible for monitoring College responses and progress on addressing programme recommendations (the latter through the AMMP process). Institutional recommendations arising across the programme reviews shall be considered by the Universitys Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee by means of a report from the Academic Board. Programme Review Reports shall be retained by both the College and the Academic Registry for a period of at least 5 years as it will inform future annual monitoring and periodic reviews. It may also be subject to audit by the Universitys Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee, by the QAA or other bodies responsible for assuring quality and standards. In order to address any personnel changes it is strongly recommended that periodic review reports are stored electronically and in the Colleges Administrative Office to facilitate easy retrieval and subsequent review.

(vi)

6.2.13 Student Involvement and Reporting to Students (i) Student opinion should be involved in periodic programme review through consideration of questionnaire feedback, student-staff consultative committee minutes and through questioning by the Programme Review Panel. Students are also members on the Review Panel. In obtaining student feedback at programme level, students should be asked to comment on the programmes structure, its administration, delivery and support, e.g. timetabling, feedback, handbooks, pastoral arrangements, employability elements etc. The outcomes of Periodic Programme Review should be made available to students in accordance with the Universitys policy on student feedback (see Section 5.3 of the Teaching Quality Manual). This could involve publishing the completed proforma and/or advising the next Student-Staff Consultative Committee of the key monitoring outcomes and action plan.

(ii)

6.2.14 Approving Changes to a Programme (i) As a consequence of the periodic review process, College Learning and Teaching Committees and Programme Directors are reminded about the following University procedures concerning amending/withdrawing modules or programmes. a) Minor changes to individual modules or to the intended learning outcomes of the programme should be updated via the Swansea University Intranet, which shall hold the central record of the programme specification and the modules.

Section 6

119

b)

Major changes to the programme, should they be required, should be submitted to the Administrative Officer, Academic Registry who should be provided with an updated Programme Specification so that module and/or programme changes can be recorded. Major changes (see section 3.2.3 for the guidelines on what constitutes a major change) will require re-validation of the programme via the relevant Academic Board and its Standing Panel, Validation.

(ii)

For further details on the level of autonomy that Colleges have in making changes, see the policy on amending programme specifications (Section 3.2.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual) and also the related procedures for making other changes to a programme (Section 3.2.3 of the Manual). Should there be a decision to withdraw a programme, the appropriate procedures in Section 3.3 of the Teaching Quality Manual must be followed.

(iii)

6.2.15 Process/timetable (i) The periodic review timescale is five years. The specific dates for conducting periodic review are set by the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee.

6.3

PROFESSIONAL BODY REPORTS

6.3.1 Introduction This section outlines the procedures for responding to Professional Body Reports, at College and University levels. The section explains the responsibilities of Colleges and the various quality Committees in the process which apply to all undergraduate and taught postgraduate programmes of study at Swansea University. 6.3.2 Aims and Objectives To ensure that the reports of Professional Bodies have been considered thoroughly by Colleges, and are reported to the University. To provide an infrastructure to enable the University and Colleges to respond to issues of concern. To provide a mechanism for disseminating good practice within and across Colleges and the University as a whole. The ultimate aim is to ensure that the students' learning experience is continually enhanced and improved.

120

Section 6

6.3.3 Responsibilities Professional Bodies After each accreditation event, Professional Bodies are required to submit a report to the College under investigation outlining any areas of concern, and noting any commendations. Once the College has responded to the concerns to the satisfaction of the Professional Body, written confirmation is provided to note that the programmes of study under investigation have been formally accredited. The professional body will keep a record of the approved periods of accreditation and the dates for future accreditation submission. Academic Colleges Colleges are requested to advise the Quality Office, Academic Registry of the schedule for any accreditation, in particular visits by the Professional Body and to provide the Quality Office with a copy of the accreditation report and the Colleges response and action plan to that report. Colleges are required to consider the reports of their Professional Bodies. In consultation with the College, the Head of College responds promptly to Professional Body Reports and suggests a relevant course of action to obtain final accreditation. Following confirmation that accreditation has been granted, the Head of College must provide the Quality Office with a short report (please see Web Link 24, Appendix 14) and a copy of the Professional Body Report. This report will outline the action which has been taken arising from the report and identifying any issues of concern distinguishing between issues relevant to the College and to the University as a whole. The Quality Office is responsible for forwarding these reports to the RQSC. It is required that the key recommendations and actions in response to professional body reports are also discussed in annual monitoring reports (AMMP1). Regulations, Standards and Quality Committee The RQSC has a Quality Control function. It ensures that Colleges have addressed issues raised by Professional Bodies. The RQSC examines the professional body reports and College response to determine if any issues have a broader University-wide concern and might advise Professional Bodies of any action that the University will be taking regarding these issues. The other important role of the RQSC is to identify examples of good practice and disseminate them within the University. Staff of the Academic Registry undertake this function in liaison with the Swansea Academy of Learning and Teaching.

Section 6

121

Academic Registry The Academic Registry services the various University Quality Committees to which the reports (and/or issues arising from them) are referred and acts as the central record-keeper of professional reports, College responses and institutional comments. 6.3.4 Deadlines There are generally no established deadlines across Colleges when accreditation occurs, and hence the date for receipt of Professional Body Reports is varied. If there are any issues for concern, the Professional Body will require these to be addressed within a fairly short timeframe prior to granting full accreditation. As good practice, Colleges that are subject to external accreditation should forward copies of the Professional Body reports and their response as promptly as possible to the earliest RQSC meeting. 6.3.5 Issues requiring immediate action If there are institutional issues requiring immediate action, Colleges should contact the Quality Office and Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Experience) as chair of the RQSC immediately. Appropriate action shall then be taken. 6.3.6 The Process, in Outline The flow chart in Appendix 8 summarises the process for dealing with Professional Body Reports. 6.3.7 Conclusion Accreditation forms an important quality assurance and enhancement role for Colleges whose programmes of study require independent, professional evaluation. The purpose of receiving reports on this process is to provide assurance that Colleges have or are responding to any areas of concern. Additionally, the University is apprised of any institution-wide issues that the Professional Body Report has identified. Ultimately the process has been designed to ensure that we are confident that the students' learning experience is of the highest quality at all times, by eliminating problems quickly and improving procedures by disseminating good practice. By so doing the University aims to ensure that Swansea's provision is of the highest standard possible at all times.

122

Section 6

6.4

ACADEMIC QUALITY INDICATORS REVIEW

6.4.1 Introduction
In order to have a more thorough overview of the quality of the student experience an academic quality indicators report will be maintained and reported to the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee each year. The Quality Office in conjunction with the Planning and Strategic Projects Unit and the Information Services and Systems (ISS) will keep the register of indicators. Poor performance across these indicators may trigger a cause for concern review (see below).

6.4.2 Quality Indicators

The following indicators will form the report. Where shown the information from the Performance Indicators report produced by ISS will be used. These indicators will include taught and research students. The indicators will as far as possible be targeted at JACS level 3. This will allow for comparability with other institutions and allow breakdown by subject area.

NSS, PTES or PRES results (in Performance indicators [PI] report for NSS not for PTES/PRES) DLHE results (in PI report) Professional or Statutory Body report (this will not apply in all areas) Complaints numbers and serious nature of complaints Appeals numbers and serious nature of appeals Student retention rates (in PI report) Progression rates Significant concerns identified in one or more external examiners report

6.4.3 Quality Indicators report

Each year the report will be tabled at the first meeting of the Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee. This report will be circulated and should be considered alongside the AMMP forms being completed by Colleges. The report will be updated annually. However, where additional factors identified throughout the year it may be appropriate to update the report accordingly. Academic staff shall be consulted upon the thresholds for evaluating performance.

6.4.4 Cause for concern review

Section 1.3.2 of the Teaching Quality Manual empowers the institution to undertake cause for concern reviews. Where it is decided by the PVC Student Experience and/or the Learning and Teaching Committee that in reviewing the quality indicators report a College or subject area is performing poorly across a range of indicators or very poorly in a few indicators a cause for concern review may be undertaken.

Section 6

123

6.5

EXTERNAL INPUT INTO PROGRAMME DESIGN, APPROVAL MONITORING AND REVIEW

We value the range of ways in which externality is obtained in maintaining standards and assuring the quality of our provision and student experience. Externality is provided through: external examiners (assuring standards of provision and commenting on proposed changes or proposals for new programmes); periodic reviews (reviewers are selected to reflect the multi-disciplinary nature of the College); ad-hoc reviews; validations (one specialist is selected from two names proposed by the College); professional/statutory body reviews; appeals; Industrial Liaison Committees and general involvement of employers in the curriculum (see Employer Needs statement http://www.swansea.ac.uk/careers/Recruiters/EmployerNeedsandTrends/) involvement of the HE Academy in advising us on our Learning and Teaching Strategy in 2007; external reviews of administrative departments within the Quality Management System; external quality accreditation for support departments, including the Charter Mark for LIS and Investors in People for Catering and the Taliesin Arts Centre; External representatives on Unprofessional conduct or fitness to practise cases.

We greatly value the contribution of external peers to our quality assurance and enhancement mechanisms. Employer feedback is sought during programme development and delivery, in particular in vocational subjects (see the Employer needs statement). Professional body accreditation visits clearly involve assessors external to the University. The University encourages feedback from alumni on our service and academic programmes and would encourage this feedback in particular in the context of programme review/revalidation. 6.6 ENHANCEMENT REVIEWS

6.6.1 Introduction To reflect the QAAs approach to institutional review and to enhance the existing quality assurance and enhancement mechanisms within Swansea University a thematic review-based methodology was implemented in the 2005/06 academic session.

124

Section 6

In addition to these reviews the University has participated in a number of the Higher Education Academys Enhancement Themes which are broad areas of work primarily aimed at sharing good practice in relation to a theme. Thus it was decided in the 2008-09 session that to take a broader view of enhancement across the institution and combine these approaches to create co-ordinated workstreams of enhancement and review actions. A number of these enhancement themes would be decided each year aligned to institutional learning and teaching priorities. These enhancement themes would mean a joined up programme across the institution consisting of, enhancement events (good practice seminars, sessions at the Learning and Teaching Conference), the creation and promotion of resources, reviewing existing practice, and promoting new approaches and initiatives. The mix of review and enhancement in each theme may differ but a similar approach could be adopted for each case. This methodology is based upon a panel of academic staff looking at a particular theme across the institution and the sector as a whole. The exercise will be largely paper-based, but supplemented with interviews with staff and students in order to clarify processes and gain feedback on the effectiveness of the procedures. 6.6.2 Involvement of Supporting/Administrative Departments In order to reflect the scope of the QAA Institutional Review procedures and the range of themes identified for possible review, there is an expectation that relevant supporting departments/units will be involved in the enhancement review process. 6.6.3 Outline of Procedures Selection of Themes Prior to the commencement of an academic session, the Swansea University Learning and Teaching Committee will decide on the particular themes. A total of 3 themes per session will be prioritised from a list of topics provided to the committee by the Quality Office and Swansea Academy of Learning and Teaching. Evidence Base and Supporting Documentation There will be no requirement to produce any specific documentation for the enhancement review as the academic panel will only be using existing documentation as the evidence base for the review. This will include minutes of assorted University/College meetings, records of programme monitoring and review, external examiner reports and responses, student feedback procedures and comments, appeals and complaints procedures, etc It may be necessary to undertake surveys or interview staff and/or students or collate best practice internally externally but there will be no requirement for Colleges or Administrative Departments to create any new documentation.

Section 6

125

The evidence base needed and the documentation required will be decided upon in advance of any review taking place. Colleges and administrative departments will be contacted to obtain information to inform the enhancement review, providing them with a checklist of the documentation needed. Enhancement Theme Team and Training Each enhancement team will consist of a minimum of two academic members (usually senior members of academic staff). In addition a student member, usually a sabbatical officer of the Students Union will usually be included where appropriate. Administrative officers from the Academic Registry or Swansea Academy of Learning and Teaching will provide the administrative support for the review panel. All team members enhancement theme enhancement teams Quality Office in the Teaching. Review Sessions When the enhancement theme has been decided, a plan shall be developed by the Quality Office/SALT, in conjunction with the enhancement team and key individuals on the necessary information base and persons to involve in a series of team meetings. This plan shall be refined following initial receipt of documentation from Colleges and administrative departments. Team meetings shall involve the key individuals for the topic concerned and students, where relevant. In particular where the evidence base provided by the Colleges/administrative departments is weak or unclear, then representatives will be asked to attend a Review Session. A representative may also be asked to attend a Review Session for further clarification where an example of best practice has been identified. Review Sessions are a mandatory part of the enhancement review process and are an essential source of evidence to supplement the paper evidence supplied. Surveys of staff or students may also be used to supplement the existing evidence base. Reference Points The key documents to be used as reference points for the enhancement review panel are as follows: The QAA Academic Infrastructure and other documents produced by the QAA e.g. Code of Practice, Handbook for Institutional Review: Wales, FHEQ, CQFW, Outcomes from.... Institutional Audit Swansea University Teaching Quality Manual Relevant documents produced by the Welsh Assembly government, the HEFCW, e.g. For our futures will be expected to participate in no more than one per session. All staff participating as members of the will be provided with appropriate training by staff of the Academic Registry or Swansea Academy of Learning and

126

Section 6

Internal documentation such as the Teaching Quality Manual, Assessment Policy, Teaching, Learning and Assessment Strategy and the Strategic Plan and other relevant quality procedures for administrative departments Survey results e.g. NSS, PTES, PRES, International Student Barometer, Student Satisfaction Survey, etc Thematic documentation related to good practice in institutional research from e.g. the Higher Education Academy, other Institutions, the Welsh Assembly Government

Timescale for enhancement themes Enhancement Themes will be decided at the final meeting of the Learning and Teaching Committee of the session. Enhancement Themes will usually run over a whole session but with meetings likely to take place over a shorter time frame such as a few months and enhancement actions extending throughout the year. Enhancement Theme Outputs Each enhancement theme will result in a number of outputs likely to include a report, seminars, sessions at the Learning and Teaching Conference, articles in the SALT newsletter and learning and teaching resources on the SALT website. Where the theme includes a report it will include the following information: Documentation reviewed; Staff and students interviewed; Specific audit trails pursued and the results; A statement on whether institutional procedures are being implemented correctly; A statement on whether the institutional policies are clear and understood; A statement on how practice has been enhanced, e.g. seminars, articles in SALT newsletter, A statement on advisable recommendations (for immediate implementation); A statement on desirable recommendations (for future implementation); An action plan including responsibilities and timescales for implementation.

The report will be prepared using the report template provided by the Quality Office, Academic Registry. The report will be submitted to the next meeting of the Learning and Teaching Committee. The Chair of the Enhancement Review Panel will attend the meeting to present and discuss the report.

Section 6

127

Post Review Procedures Upon completion of the enhancement review process, the Learning and Teaching Committee is responsible for any continued monitoring of the recommendations for action and ensuring that Heads of Colleges or administrative departments implement the recommendations and for feeding the results of the enhancement review into the quality management review system. Copies of the review reports will also be retained by the Quality Office of the Academic Registry, and used to inform institutional review preparations and procedures. 6.7 Swansea Academy of Learning and Teaching Swansea Academy of Learning and Teaching (SALT) works to enhance the student experience through sharing and promoting good practice, sponsoring and promoting pedagogic research, and enhancing the profile of learning and teaching across the institution. All members of the university are members of SALT, while recipients of the Distinguished Teaching Award acquire status as Fellows. As well as providing a home for resources and supporting quality enhancement, SALT actively develops pedagogy through a programme of seminars and workshops aimed at disseminating interesting and innovative practice. In addition, the annual Excellence in Learning and Teaching Conference showcases good and best practice from across the University and beyond. SALT is working to develop a community of practice amongst staff at Swansea University interested in promoting excellence in learning and teaching, and enhancing the learning experience and achievement of our students. In addition to the above activities, SALT produces a termly newsletter and has a website containing a range of additional resources, including funding opportunities in relation to teaching. If you are aware of examples of good practice which could be beneficially shared across the institution or you would like advice or support in developing an aspect of your learning and teaching, please contact SALT on salt@swansea.ac.uk.

128

Section 6

SECTION 7: DELIVERING PROGRAMMES SUPPORT FOR LEARNING AND TEACHING

7.1 INTRODUCTION

This section of the Quality Manual details the ways in which programmes of study are managed and the administrative procedures that should be followed should students decide to alter their selected modules or programme, or wish to cease their studies either temporarily or permanently. This section also outlines the support that staff and students can expect. Further details on these issues may be found in relevant sections of the on-line Academic Guide. 7.2 MANAGEMENT OF PROGRAMMES

Programmes of study are managed by Home Colleges who are responsible for coordinating the admission of students and monitoring students progress throughout the programme. Home Colleges are also responsible for assigning personal tutors (or supervisors for postgraduate students) and offering pastoral care, identifying compulsory and core modules, approving the selection and transfer of modules and programmes made by students. Home Colleges are required to ensure the accuracy and currency of the module information as changes occur, via the Universitys Intranet. This includes specifying whether the module will be available in the following session and updating the modules description. This data is used for the following purposes 1) as the basis of creating the on-line and printed Catalogue of Modules and 2) for production of a Module Selection Form, which is completed by the student during enrolment 3) for determining College FTE load and student funding subject areas. The Universitys administration co-ordinates enrolment on programmes of study and modules annually around the anniversary start date of each course and undertakes validation exercises throughout the academic year to ensure the accuracy of information held on a central database. As this data is used to generate the teaching and examination timetables and the qualification that the student will be awarded, it is vitally important that Colleges have established an appropriate programme structure and students check their University records periodically. Each year, Home Colleges must also co-ordinate obtaining student feedback on the modules and overall programme (see Policy on Student Feedback, Section 5.3.2). Home Colleges must analyse this feedback as one element of their annual monitoring of modules and programmes. Home Colleges are also responsible for discussing and analysing end of year examination data, in particular final classification results (see Section 5.2 regarding procedures for Annual Monitoring of Modules and Programmes). 7.3 MONITORING ACADEMIC PROGRESS

All Colleges monitor the attendance, conduct and progress of students throughout the academic year. The Universitys policy on attendance is found in the on-line Academic Guide. Students whose performance shows particular cause for concern will be asked to explain the reasons for unsatisfactory progress to their personal tutor
Section 7 129

and/or Head of College. Should the problem persist the case will be reported to the Academic Board, Student Cases sub-committee, which will determine what course of action is appropriate in each case. Students who are repeating the Level of Study or who are repeating failed modules and whose attendance and/or progress remains a cause for concern may be required to withdraw from the University at any time during the academic year. The regulations and procedures regarding academic progress are outlined in the relevant sections of the on-line Academic Guide. 7.4 ATTENDANCE POLICY

The University will monitor students attendance and will take relevant action involving those students whose attendance is deemed to be unsatisfactory. The University expects you to attend all the teaching sessions associated with each module which you have elected to pursue. You must also adhere to the Colleges requirements identified in the College Attendance Policy, relating to compulsory teaching sessions. The need to monitor your attendance is primarily in order to enable personal tutors to undertake a pastoral role, to ensure your well-being. Attendance is also monitored as a requirement of External Authorities e.g LEAs, Sponsors, UK Border Agency (UKBA). Your College will identify at least one interaction per month during term time for students pursuing Taught programmes, with 3 instances of interaction per semester. An interaction shall be defined as a contact between a student and an academic or administrative staff member for instance a tutorial, seminar, lecture, practical session, field trip, a meeting with a Personal Tutor, an examination sitting, completing an attendance register etc. If you are in Part Two of your Taught Masters programme, you will be monitored on a monthly basis. Such interactions would normally include formal supervision sessions. If you are absent for any period of time you must provide your College with an explanation for your absence. Wherever possible you should seek permission in advance for any absences, this includes any time spent away from Swansea for research or personal reasons. A form is available from your College. If you are an overseas student a central university monitoring system shall also be applied. You will be required to sign a monthly register to confirm your attendance and continued engagement with their programme on a monthly basis. This is in addition to complying with their Colleges attendance policy. At least one central interaction shall be identified each month (during term time for students on taught programmes) with 3 points of interaction per semester. You will be notified of the dates on which you will be required to register by the Academic Registry. If your attendance is unsatisfactory over two consecutive months you will be reported to Academic Board, Student Cases sub-committee. Continued unsatisfactory attendance may result in you be required to withdraw from the University. The University shall notify relevant authorities (Sponsors, Local Education Authorities, UKBA etc) of any student who is withdrawn from the University as soon as practically possible following the decision, taking into account the students right of appeal.

130

Section 7

Such a confirmation of withdrawal may be delayed for up to a period of one month following the original decision. It is for this reason that you must try to meet the deadlines set for submitting appeals. The University does not accept responsibility for the consequences of informing External Agencies of a students withdrawal if these deadlines have not been met and if the Universitys attention has not been drawn to the relevant information. The College needs to identify at least one interaction per month during term time, with 3 instances of interaction per semester. Colleges must inform students and the Academic Registry of these identified interactions. The Universitys Attendance Policy can be found under the Publications tab on the Academic Registry Website. http://www.swan.ac.uk/registry/Publications/. 7.5 ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES

The Student Records Office on receipt of authorised change of circumstances outlined below processes the changes, adjusts the programme fee due and notifies the relevant Colleges, departments and external sponsors, local and government authorities. 7.5.1 Student Suspensions/Student Withdrawals The University is sympathetic to those students who feel compelled, for various reasons, to interrupt their studies during an academic session. Academic staff, Academic Registry staff, Student Support Services staff and the Student Records Office will provide advice to students who are considering withdrawing or suspending studies at the University. Procedures for the withdrawal/suspension of study may be found in relevant sections of the on-line Academic Guide and also on the Academic Registrys website. Copies of the proformas are available on the Intranet (see Documents and Information > All documents, forms and reports > Students). 7.5.2 Transfer of Modules Students pursuing a modular programme are required to select optional modules on an annual basis, but can change them within certain deadlines, depending on over what period the module is taught. Staff are again referred to the on-line Academic Guide for the detailed procedures and the Intranet for a copy of the proforma (termed module selection authorisation slip with different ones for undergraduate and taught postgraduate students see Documents and Information > All documents, forms and reports > Students). 7.5.3 Transfer of Programmes Students are permitted to transfer their programme of study if, after consultation with the tutors, programme co-ordinators and Head of College, it is felt that the change is in the best interest of the student. If the transfer of programme also entails a transfer of modules, the deadlines for the transfer of modules apply.

Section 7

131

The Academic Registrys website lists the procedures that must be followed if students wish to transfer a programme. Hard copies of the proforma are also available from Colleges or can be downloaded from the Intranet (see Documents and Information > All documents, forms and reports > Students). 7.5.4 Repeating Year of Study (only applies to undergraduate students) If non-final year undergraduate students fail a module, the failure is often redeemed through sitting a supplementary examination or repeating the level of study. Full details of these options are noted in the Academic Guide. Students (except those in their final year) who fail to acquire sufficient credit to be awarded supplementary examinations or who fail to complete a level of study following the supplementary examinations, will normally be required to forfeit any credit gained and repeat the level of study. The marks of students who repeat the level of study shall not be capped. Non-final year Candidates who are required to repeat a level of study, may apply to repeat the failed modules only as internal students. Students who wish to apply to do so must complete the proforma (available on the Intranet, see Documents and Information > All documents, forms and reports > Students). Candidates should not expect, as of right, to be permitted to repeat failed modules. Applications must be made to the Home College and submitted to the Academic Registrar for full approval. It may not be possible for international students with specific visa requirements to resit failed modules only. The marks who candidates who repeat failed modules only or sit supplementary examinations in Levels 2, 3 and S, provided they satisfy the examiners, shall be capped at 40%. Final Year candidates, who fail to acquire sufficient credit to complete the final year of study, may be offered an opportunity to repeat failed modules during the next academic Year (subject to attaining a minimum number of credits). The marks shall be capped at 40% in Level 3 and 50% in Level M. Final Year students are not permitted to forfeit credit and repeat the Level of Study. 7.6 PASTORAL CARE

7.6.1 Personal Tutors Students in each College are allocated personal tutors, with whom they will usually, but not necessarily come into contact as teaching staff. Students will normally wish to discuss matters relating specifically to their coursework with their programme tutors. Frequently, however, problems arise which affect a students work overall and are best discussed with the personal tutor, who can advise on an appropriate course of action. It is, therefore, most important that students keep in touch with their personal tutors. Students can find out who their personal tutor is by accessing their record on the Intranet. Students who have not been allocated a personal tutor should contact their Head of College. The Universitys policy on personal tutoring may be found in the Academic Guide. Tutors are provided with the Personal Tutors Handbook as reference material to assist them in their pastoral role.

132

Section 7

In accordance with the policy on Learning and Professional Development (LEAP) see Section 7.8 of this Manual) some Colleges may wish to assist students by undertaking such activities within their personal tutorials. Students should therefore be prepared to discuss with their personal tutor how they feel they have learnt during the course of pursuing modules/practicals / placements etc. 7.6.2 Student Welfare Student Services Student Services comprises the support services listed below, Residential Services and English Language Training Services. The department aims to provide integrated, professional, student-centred services, which offer information, advice and support to enable every student to develop and achieve their full potential. The main Reception is situated in the Keir Hardie Building Student Support Services: The Disability Office The Money Advice and Support Office The International Student Advisory Service Student Wellbeing Services (Horton House) You will find details of these individual services in the Student Services Handbook and on the University website at: http://www.swansea.ac.uk/study/current/StudentSupportServices. Student Services work in close co-operation with academic Colleges, the Careers Service, the Chaplaincy, Mosque and the Students Union. Whether you or students have a general enquiry, a specific problem or you just need to talk things through, Student Services offer professional and confidential services to students and a point of referral for staff. Staff who are uncertain about advising students on any non-academic matter are encouraged to contact the Department to discuss the issue. Students Union Advice Centre The Students Union Advice Centre offers independent impartial advice administered by permanent Professional Welfare Advisers. The work of the centre is also supported by the representational work of the Sabbatical Officers. Advice, guidance and support is provided to help with most problems faced by students during their stay at University, and is offered on a one to one or group basis. Support will continue until a satisfactory outcome is reached. Services offered include mediation, negotiation and representation. Advice is given on many issues including tenure, accommodation, debt, benefits, housing, emotional, representation, appeals, academic and employment.

Section 7

133

The aim of the Centre is to ensure that students transition through academia is as stress free as possible, in order to achieve their highest potential. The Advice Centre is based on the ground floor of Fulton House opposite the Digital Technium. For more information and to book an appointment please contact Jen Preece the Advice Centre Secretary on 01792 295821. Support for International Students The University recognises that students from outside the United Kingdom sometimes require additional support to enable a successful transition into undergraduate or postgraduate studies. To this end, the International Student Advisory Service provides a fully comprehensive pre-arrival handbook, which is followed up with orientation and induction events specifically for international students during Freshers Week and at the start of the second semester. The Advisory Service, which is part of Student Support Services offers information and advice on nonacademic matters to all international students and their families throughout their stay. Guidelines are produced by the Advisory Service to assist academic and support staff to handle more effectively some of the specific issues facing these students. In addition to this, training is provided to groups of staff on request and individual staff can seek advice and support with specific cases. The Guidelines for Academic Staff and Guidelines for Support Staff are available on the Universitys Intranet (see Web Link 25, Appendix 15). Students with a query in relation to the Points Based Immigration System should seek advice from the International Student Advisory Service, as they are the only University staff authorised to give immigration advice under the regulatory scheme administered by the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC). 7.7 POLICY ON RECORDING LECTURES

7.7.1 Introduction It is the policy of Swansea University to provide equal opportunities for all staff and students and therefore it is fully committed to the principles established in the Disability Discrimination Act and the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act (2001). The University has implemented a policy for the equality of opportunities in its Disability Equality Scheme (M1874) and its integral Action Plan. As a further implementation of its commitments, the University hereby implements this Policy on the Recording of Oral or Visual Presentations by students. 7.7.2 The Law and Reasonable Adjustments The Special Educational Needs Disability Act (SENDA) (2002) amended the Disability Discrimination Act (1995), and obliged all Higher Education (HE) institutions to provide reasonable adjustments to ensure disabled students were not placed at a disadvantage to their peers.
134 Section 7

7.7.3 Recording of Oral or Visual Presentations Recording lectures is one the recommendations made in an Assessment of Needs which determines the adjustments the University is required to consider when supporting a disabled student. In 2003, Skill National Bureau for Students with Disability, the former Disability Rights Commission and NATFHE, the former lecturers union (which has joined the University and College Union), explored the issues related to the recording of lectures by disabled students. As a result of that effort, a consensus developed that the recording of lectures by disabled students is considered to be a reasonable adjustment. A university lecturer makes oral presentations in various forms, including lectures, seminars, tutorials, practical experiences, or field trips and for students who find it difficult to hand write written notes, recording lectures of oral or visual presentations may be a reasonable alternative. As stated in section 4.3 of the Universitys Policy on Intellectual Property The University shall be granted an unconditional, perpetual and irrevocable nonexclusive right to copy, use and modify these materials for all purposes connected with the University and any affiliated or subsidiary institution. The license related to Academic materials shall be non-exclusive. The license for Teaching Materials, lesson plans and learning modules shall be exclusive during the term of employment and non-exclusive thereafter. In its discretion, the University will provide reasonable and appropriate acknowledgement of the Creator. 7.7.4 Procedure The Disability Caseworker will notify the Disability Link Tutor in the relevant College that the student shall be recording the oral or visual presentations. It is the responsibility of the Disability Link Tutor to disseminate this information to relevant colleagues to ensure they are aware of the students needs. Thus, lecturers should know which students will be recording their lectures. The Disability Caseworker will also advise the student to approach the lecturer out of courtesy and ask permission to record a lecture although the right to record a lecture is not dependent on students disclosing their disability or needs. In the event that the lecturer does not permit the recording of his/her material, the student is advised to contact the Disability Caseworker. In most cases, students will be provided with their own recording equipment. However, there may be occasions when the Disability Link Tutor will be responsible for contacting colleagues in the Media Resources Department to make such arrangements that will facilitate the recording of the oral presentations or other adjustments to enhance the learning experience for the student.

The lecturer must inform the other students or attendees that the oral presentation will be recorded.
Section 7 135

Procedure for Visiting Lecturers It should be noted that the Universitys Intellectual Property Policy applies to those who use its facilities in accordance with section 2.2. A visiting lecturer should be informed of this Policy by the course organiser and permission for a disabled student to record a lecture should be obtained. If the visiting lecturer does not give this permission, it is the responsibility of the Disability Caseworker, the Disability Link Tutor and the lecturer to develop alternative provisions to ensure that the student is not disadvantaged.

136

Section 7

7.7.5 Exceptions In some cases it may not be possible to record oral or visual presentations, for example, when considering patients in medical or clinical teaching or when confidential information is exchanged in counselling courses in which class members or others may share their personal histories. The student should be informed before the course starts (in the course handbook) if it is not possible to record information. In cases where other students are permitted to take notes, the Disability Caseworker, the Disability Link Tutor and the lecturer should discuss the needs of the disabled students and of the other attendees and participants, and implement an alternative method to ensure that the disabled student is not placed at a substantial disadvantage. For example, one alternative to recording oral or visual presentations would be to appoint a person to take notes for the disabled students.

7.7.6 Copyright and Student Responsibility The Copyright of teaching materials remains the property of the creator. However, the University shall be granted an unconditional, perpetual and irrevocable nonexclusive right to copy, use and modify these materials for all purposes connected with the University and any affiliated or subsidiary institution as stated in the University Intellectual Property Policy. In furtherance of its commitments to equal opportunities, the University permits the sound or visual recording of oral presentations under the following conditions, and the student by recording such presentations, commits to adhere to these conditions: The intellectual property rights of the sound or visual recordings shall remain with the University, and shall be exclusive during the term of employment and non-exclusive thereafter. In its discretion, the University will provide reasonable and appropriate acknowledgement of the Creator. The student may only use the recording for his or her own personal use for personal study and these may not be reproduced or distributed to others (except to someone who will transcribe the recording).

Disciplinary measures will be taken if the student does not comply with the Policy by copying and/or distributing such recordings. It should also be noted that students have a responsibility to attend lectures (see Policy on Attendance in the Academic Guide). Asking someone to record a lecture is not a substitute for attendance.

The recording of lectures is considered a reasonable adjustment under the DDA and lecturers who withhold their permission may, under the individual liability provision of the DDA, be taken to court.

Section 7

137

7.7.7 Reference Material The recommendations outlined in this policy are based on the SKILL Guidance on Intellectual Copyright and Recording Lectures by Jenni Dyer (2007). The Universitys Intellectual Property Policy The Universitys Disability Equality Scheme (M1874)

7.8

POLICY ON SUPERVISION OF POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT MASTERS STUDENTS TAUGHT MASTERS DISSERTATIONS

7.8.1 Responsibility Colleges/Departments must provide advice and guidance to the student with the aim of facilitating the production of a dissertation of the requisite standard for a Taught Masters degree. The dissertation shall be the candidates own work (the content of the dissertation shall be the responsibility of the student), albeit achieved with the benefit of advice and guidance from the supervisor. Supervisors should exercise great care in the comments made to candidates regarding the final outcome of the degree to which a dissertation will contribute i.e. Supervisors should not attempt to predict that the student will pass with merit/distinction. Full-time students are required to be in attendance at the University and be available for Supervision during Part Two. Students undertaking research away from the University or leaving Swansea for personal reasons must request an authorisation of absence from the Head of College or his/her delegate. Students who are absent without authorization will be reported to Academic Board, Student Cases subcommittee and may be withdrawn from the University. 7.8.2 Selecting a Topic Colleges/Departments, collectively or through a designated individual e.g. the coordinator, should ensure that the dissertation topics are appropriate to a Postgraduate Taught Masters research related degree programme. It is expected that the dissertation topic would normally be agreed before the completion of Part One. Dissertation topics should be recorded on the Record of Supervision sheet see 5.1. The dissertation proposal should lie within the broad field of expertise of the Supervisor(s). The dissertation subject should be identified following discussion between the student and the supervisor(s) and should be approved centrally by the College/ Department. Where possible topics should be so designed that more than one member of staff may assist the student. The names of staff suitably qualified should be conveyed to the student.

138

Section 7

Candidates may begin writing their dissertation during Part One of the programme but will only be permitted to submit their dissertation following successful completion of Part One. 7.8.3 Timescale The dissertation proposal should be agreed in accordance with Universitys deadline for submission of dissertations and should be suitable for completion within the allotted time span e.g. for full-time student this would normally be 15 October (13 months after the start of the programme.) Students experiencing unexpected personal or medical difficulties should notify their College/Department as soon as possible. Colleges/Departments may consider requesting an extension to the time-limit when such difficulties arise. 7.8.4 Timetable of Supervision The University requires Colleges/Departments to hold a minimum of three formal compulsory meetings. Where possible these should take the form of face to face meetings between the Supervisor and student. Students attendance shall be monitored at these meetings. Colleges/Departments wishing to provide additional supervision may do so. Colleges requiring additional meetings should make these requirements known to the student via the College Handbook. Normally the same supervisor would be expected to be present for all of these meetings. Colleges/Departments must ensure that cover is provided to students in cases of staff absence, including holidays or sickness. Colleges/ Departments should ensure that students are informed of cover arrangements during the summer period. A record will be kept of students who fail to attend meetings and such records shall be available to Exam Boards/Appeals Committees. Every College/Department shall hold a minimum of three formal meetings for fulltime students as outlined below. In the case of part-time students it may be more appropriate to offer additional meetings to monitor progress over Part Two and it is recommended that a minimum of four meetings are held. A record, agreed between the Supervisor and the student shall be kept, including dates, action agreed and deadlines set (a recommended template is provided in Appendix 9). The student shall be responsible for maintaining this record and shall submit it with the dissertation. It is expected that the student will meet with the Supervisor in person. However, it is recognised that this may not be possible in the case of some schemes e.g. distance learning schemes. In such circumstances the College/student are expected to keep a formal record of the meeting, including reference to the format of the meeting e.g. e-mail, video conferencing, telephone. Students undertaking research away from the University or leaving Swansea for personal reasons must request an authorisation of absence from the Head of College or his/her delegate.

Section 7

139

Meeting 1 June (Full-time and Part-Time students) The first meeting shall take place immediately following confirmation of the completion of Part One. It is anticipated that students will already have chosen their dissertation topic and made some preliminary progress. This meeting should be used to formalise a detailed work plan for the dissertation set deadlines for completion of work and discuss the structure of the dissertation. It is recommended that this meeting also be used to ensure that the student understands the issue of unfair practice (plagiarism) and the referencing style required. Meeting 2 August (Full-time students) November (Part-Time students) In the case of full-time students a second meeting should normally take place in late July/early August. In the case of part-time students this meeting will normally occur by November. Colleges may wish to hold a further meeting for part-time students, to monitor their progress. Colleges/students may use this meeting to discuss progress and discuss draft sections of the work. Supervisors should ensure that a student is still able to complete the work in accordance with their work plan. In the case of full-time students any issues which may necessitate requesting an extension (such as personal difficulties/illness which will affect their ability to complete on time) should be identified at this meeting and Colleges should consider whether they wish to submit a request for an extension to the submission deadline. It should be noted that the Special Cases Committee will meet at the beginning of September to discuss extension requests for full-time students and therefore applications should be considered and approved by the College by the end of August. Specific deadlines will be circulated to Colleges / Departments each session. Meeting 3 (part-time students only) Colleges may wish to introduce a further meeting in the case of part-time students to monitor progress and ensure that a student is still able to complete within the schedule outlined in the work plan. Draft sections of work may also be discussed at this meeting. Any issues which may necessitate requesting an extension, such as personal difficulties/illness should be identified at this meeting and Colleges should consider whether they wish to submit a request for an extension to the submission deadline.

140

Section 7

Final Meeting September A third and normally final meeting should be held approximately one month later (for full-time students) and certainly before 20 September which should allow for final amendments. In the case of part-time students this meeting should occur in the September 15 months on from completion of Part One (June Board). This meeting shall include a report on the progress of the student and a draft of the final work should be discussed. Students are expected to provide a draft of the final work in good time for Supervisors to read and comment on the draft at the meeting. Supervisors are expected to comment on the draft in broad terms but are not expected to proof read, correct typographical errors etc. 7.8.5 Submission Students shall be expected to submit to the College/Department a copy of the written record of their formal meetings on supervision. The University strongly recommends that, wherever possible, Colleges adopt the template available from the Academic Registry. This record shall be kept in the student file within the College/Department and may be provided to the Academic Registry in cases of appeal. 7.8.6 Resubmissions Students who fail the dissertation and who are permitted to resubmit their dissertation should be given one formal feedback session including, written feedback on the reasons for failure, immediately following confirmation of the result by the university Award Board. Colleges / Departments should ensure that the feedback reflects all comments from examiners (internal plus, where applicable, external) and that the student is informed of the necessary changes required. Students re-submitting their dissertations are considered enrolled resubmitting. Fulltime students will be expected to be in attendance at Swansea unless their absence has been authorised by the Head of College or his/her designate. 7.9 POLICY ON LEARNING AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

7.9.1 Introduction Higher Education Institutions in the UK were required to introduce, by 2005/06, as part of the Progress File initiative a means by which students can monitor, build and reflect upon their personal development which has been termed personal development planning (PDP).

Section 7

141

The PDP process offered to students at Swansea is called Learning and Professional Development (LEAP), which links with both the continuing professional development term used by employers and the government promoted concept of lifelong learning. It is recognised that this process of LEAP improves student learning and promotes employability 1 and it has been agreed that pertinent activities be embedded within existing teaching and learning activities. The following policy is based upon this recognition and takes into account the Guidelines for HE Progress Files published in 2001 by UUK, SCOL, Universities Scotland, LTSN and the QAA, and upon Swanseas prior experience. Swansea shall fulfil the requirements of the UKs policy on HE Progress Files by
(a)

(b)

providing a transcript to every taught student which confirms their achievement in the modules and programme pursued this is already in place; and ensuring that all academic departments are providing opportunities for all students to monitor, build and reflect upon their Learning and Professional Development (LEAP).

7.9.2 Learning and Professional Development Policy Learning and Professional Development (LEAP) is an activity which
(a) (b) (c)

promotes academic learning, skill acquisition and development, proves graduate employability and prepares students for, and links with, employers continuing professional development programmes,

and is embedded within existing academic processes. It is undertaken by all students pursuing taught and research programmes, at all levels of study and is supported primarily by academic staff with assistance from other University administrative/support departments and student-led organisations where relevant. It is an inherent part of the academic programme, methods of teaching and learning and systems of tutorial support or supervision provided by academic departments. The core issues of Learning and Professional Development (LEAP) are: Ensuring that students take (personal) responsibility for their development; and

we take the stance that there is no undue tension between a concern for good learning in a subject and an interest in promoting employability. There is sufficient research to indicate that our stance need not compromise a commitment to promote subject understanding and practices. Learning and Employability, The pedagogy for employability group, LTSN June 2004.

142

Section 7

Students using feedback formal and informal to assess (reflect on) their learning, identify strengths and weaknesses, and planning to consolidate the former and strengthen the latter.

7.9.3 College Obligations in Implementing Policy The Universitys policy is that there must, within each College, be a LEAP framework for: Introducing students to LEAP principles; Prompting students reflection on their learning; Informing students of the importance of the development of intellectual skills (as distinct from academic knowledge) and, for employability, of also learning from student jobs and leisure activities; Demonstrating that students are engaging with the process; Integrating LEAP from students study, jobs and leisure activities. Colleges are assisted by relevant support departments, e.g. Careers and Employability, Students Union, Discovery (volunteering organisation) etc in implementing this policy and in drawing the attention of students and staff to relevant opportunities for the development and enhancement of skills and personal qualities. 7.9.4 Quality Assurance and Control The College framework should be embedded within existing academic provision, methods of teaching and learning or tutorial support systems. The operation of the framework shall be subject to each Colleges internal quality assurance procedures. College arrangements shall in turn be monitored through the quality procedures as defined in the Teaching Quality Manual/Manual for Research Supervisors. 7.9.5 Universitys Role in Supporting the Implementation of Policy The University shall provide to Colleges, training, good practice guides and assistance in articulating and implementing their LEAP framework and building understanding of LEAP as a process, not a paper trail. LEAP activities shall be encouraged within the development of curriculum at modular/programme level as appropriate and where LEAP elements are currently not well represented, Colleges shall be encouraged to enhance these. 7.9.6 Implementation of the Policy The LEAP process has been in place since the end of the 2005/06 session. Strategy for Implementing LEAP Policy Every academic member of staff is provided with a copy of the Good Practice Guide to Implementing the Learning and Professional Development Policy outlining the key responsibilities for Colleges: an example of LEAP in action, web resources and contact information.

Section 7

143

7.10

All students are made aware of the Universitys commitment to LEAP and that each student has a responsibility to participate in the LEAP activities provided by their College. The LEAP Coordinator in Careers & Employability, with the agreement of Heads of Colleges, provides individual support to academic staff who are involved with delivering LEAP through the curriculum. The LEAP Coordinators responsibilities are currently met through the post of E-learning Technologist / PDP Coordinator under the South West Wales Higher Education Project (SWWHEP) in conjunction with Swansea Metropolitan University and Trinity University College, Carmarthen. This post is based within Careers & Employability , Library and Information Services at Swansea University. The LEAP Coordinator makes information resources available for both academic staff and students via the Careers & Employability website and other Internet-based platforms such as the Blackboard Virtual Learning Environment and other software to provide an E-portfolio. LEAP activities must be subject to Colleges methods of quality assurance. INFORMATION FOR STUDENTS

Colleges are required to produce annually a Handbook which outlines the programmes of study and modules offered, the College facilities, staff and the Colleges approach to providing student support services (e.g. how personal tutors are allocated). Two templates that outline the minimum requirement and suggested content for College Handbooks covering undergraduate and taught postgraduate programmes, respectively is available from the Academic Registry. Both of these templates are available on the Academic Registrys website within the A-Z guide listed under S for College Handbook Template (http://www.swansea.ac.uk/registry/AZ Guide/). Note: Specific information on placements should either form part of the usual College Handbook, or be produced separately. See Section 2.6 and the template for Placement and Work based learning handbook on the Academic Registry website within the A-Z guide listed under P for Placement Learning. (http://www.swansea.ac.uk/registry/A-ZGuide/). 7.11 SUPPORT FROM INFORMATION SERVICES AND SYSTEMS

Information Services and Systems (ISS) supports learning and teaching by: 1. assigning Subject Librarians to be the main point of contact between ISS and academic Colleges. The roles of the Subject Librarians are: to liaise with academic Colleges; to provide guidance and training in the use of ISS services; to work with academic colleagues to develop ISS collections. providing students with full access to all library and computing facilities one working day after they have enrolled with the University;

2.

144

Section 7

3.

maintaining long opening hours and working to increase off-campus and outof-hours access to our services, taking advantage of self-service and webbased solutions; providing learning spaces (conventional, electronic and wireless) for both group and individual study to meet a variety of learning styles; maintaining the campus network, including our extensive wireless network covering all University premises and all University-owned student residences; delivering effective ICT support for all students using the Universitys computing facilities; providing a modern e-learning experience, including our Blackboard learning system and sufficient quantities of wireless-enabled loan laptops; delivering an effective Careers and Employability service, to improve the employability and professional skills of all of our students (see Section 7.9 and 7.12); managing ISS collections and loan policies to ensure that books, journals and other materials both electronic and in print are provided in a timely manner, subject to resource constraints; working with academic Colleges to ensure that new students learn about Library and Information Services during their first weeks at Swansea, and that opportunities are provided for them to develop their ICT and information skills throughout their University career; employing trained staff to help students use ISS services, and developing printed and web-based guidance materials to explain and promote these services; developing specialist services to support non-traditional and disabled students; liaising with academic Colleges to ensure that ISS provides services which are appropriate and accessible to students and staff; responding promptly to any complaints or suggestions for improvement and inviting feedback through regular user surveys, print and electronic suggestions systems and liaison with the Students Union. providing a Careers and Employability Service that includes support for skills development as a key feature of the curriculum.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

Section 7

145

Academic Colleges can help ISS to support learning and teaching by: 1. all Colleges should designate a Library Representative, a Computing Representative and a Careers and Employability Representative. The roles of these representatives are: to liaise with subject librarians over the purchase, relegation and withdrawal of library materials; representing the computing needs of all students and staff in their College; engaging with Careers and Employability staff to further improve the employability and professional development of all students in their College.

2.

providing copies of reading lists to subject librarians at least one term before materials are expected to be in heavy demand; providing specialist software for installation by the Systems Team at least one term before it is required for use in PC teaching rooms; informing subject librarians at the earliest possible opportunity of plans for new modules or programmes of study, and inviting comments on the learning resources implications of these; ensuring that subject librarians are invited to attend College staff-student liaison committees and other relevant meetings; making time in academic modules for ICT and information skills training, and working with subject librarians to ensure that students develop these skills to an appropriate level as their programme progresses. the Universitys internal quality procedures for administrative is also assessed for external quality awards, currently the Excellence Award along with the Matrix Award for Careers and also undertakes an annual satisfaction survey and benchmarks indicators against those for similar services in other UK

3.

4.

5.

6.

ISS is subject to departments and Customer Service Employability. ISS key performance universities.

The availability and suitability of learning resources is continually monitored through ISS helpdesk and evaluated during periodic review, validation events and Commented upon annually during the annual monitoring exercise (see Sections 2.1, 5.2 and 6.2). The evaluation of learning resources is also a key element in all types of internal and external QAA review. It will be helpful to Colleges to consider how teaching staff work in conjunction with Library and Information Services to provide effective learning opportunities for students. ISS can support Colleges in the review process by providing relevant policy documents, guides, statistics and other supporting information. Much of this is available on the ISS website, and subject librarians will be happy to help identify the appropriate material.

146

Section 7

7.12

EMBEDDING EMPLOYABILITY ISSUES

Careers and Employability at Library and Information Services has Advisers who assist both students and staff in identifying and enhancing the transferable skills that will help students get their first job after graduation (see Appendix 10 for a list of services provided by Careers and Employability). Careers hosts the through the South West Wales Higher Education Partnership E-learning Technologist / PDP Coordinator post through SWWHEP, The South West Wales Higher Education Partnership. This post is a collaboration between Swansea University, Swansea Metropolitan University and Trinity University College, Carmarthen. The post is designed to develop virtual careers services and PDP processes, and implement new technology platforms to create a flexible, interactive learning landscape that can support students and staff in their personal, academic and professional development. GO Wales (Graduate Opportunities Wales) Placement Advisers based within Careers provide advice on finding work experience opportunities and arrange placements for both undergraduates and graduates. The Universitys Careers Education, Information, Advice and Guidance Policy (following), clarifies the roles of the University, Careers & Employability, academic Colleges and students in taking responsibility for employability issues 7.12.1 Careers Education, Information and Guidance Policy Each College has target driven employability policies and practices as part of their Business Plan. Employability performance is subject to annual review against targets set using national HESA data, and strategies and plans are developed to continuously improve performance. All Colleges report regularly to L&T on performance and progress. Colleges are expected to, Have an employability/careers strategy worthy of active promotion to prospective students; Provide every student with access to a quality, College led, employability/careers package; Enable Swansea to have an Employability PI above its benchmark1;. have low unemployment, above average proportion of graduates in graduate and graduate-track jobs, and figures for further study in line with discipline norms, all as measured by DLHE. The Careers Service provides advice to Colleges to support strategy development, planning, successful delivery of the package, and monitoring. To prepare and promote the employability of students is one of the four key aims of the Universitys Learning & Teaching Strategy. The development, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the CEIAG policy is the responsibility of the L&T Committee, operational aspects being delegated to the L&T Committees of the Colleges.

Section 7

147

The CEIAG policy aims are to provide all registered undergraduates and postgraduates with the opportunities to acquire and develop knowledge, skills and qualities to: get their first graduate level job after graduation; consider further study as a necessary or advantageous step to achieve their employment goals; use these attributes subsequently in the effective management and development of their career. ensuring consistency of provision to all students in all Colleges is a key element of the policy. The University's CEIAG policy, based on a developmental model, which accepts that career choice is the implementation of a continuously changing self-concept, encourages and supports this development, and emphasises personal responsibility for learning and career management. The CEIAG Policy has been updated in 2010 and the policy has been approved by the Learning and Teaching Committee. The CEIAG policy expects students to be able to: improve their knowledge about the graduate job market, about how organisations work, and about opportunities for graduates; explore further study options where relevant to employment interests; acquire, develop and be aware of their knowledge, skills and personal qualities; acquire and develop the knowledge and skills required for competent performance in graduate recruitment and selection processes; By the end of their studies, students should have achieved the defined outcomes from the policy see Appendix 11: CEIAG Outcomes. Students gain the knowledge, skills and qualities through: academic study; leisure time activities including employment during vacations and terms; reflective learning through LEAP, the Universitys personal development planning process 2; which provides a framework for students to undertake self-development activities in academic and non-academic settings; careers programmes, services and facilities. CEIAG provision will be: impartial options and opportunities are promoted without favour; client-focused based clearly on student and not on institutional needs; confidential student records are maintained in accordance with Data Protection Act; collaborative developed and delivered jointly by Colleges and the Careers Service; equal - programmes will be delivered within the Universitys Equal Opportunities policies.
The Universitys Personal Development Planning policy LEAP Learning and Professional Development is described in Section 7.7 of this Manual.
2

148

Section 7

The University will provide: opportunities for students to become involved in clubs, societies, sports and other extra-curricular activities through the Sports Centre, Students Union, Athletic Union and Discovery; a Careers Service with services and facilities as described in Appendix 10: Careers Service plus other appropriate support, e.g. from ISS, Knowledge Exploitation and Alumni; programmes of study with statements about employability skills and outcomes; LEAP resources - personal development planning; information to students on the services to which they are entitled from the CEIAG policy. Students who leave the University without graduating can use the Careers Service until they have started a job or course, although Connexions and Careers Wales can also be used. Graduates can use the face-to-face and e-guidance services of the service until they are in a satisfactory position; for graduates living outside of the area, other HEI careers services will also be able to provide support. Colleges L&T committees will, within the Universitys policy: allocate to a member of each College L&T committee, the responsibility for employability; set graduate destination aims and targets, based on and evaluated by data from the Destinations of Leavers from Higher Education (DLHE); review annually the Colleges Employability statement for each programme of study, and describe how targets are to be achieved; embed, and where appropriate enhance, the intellectual and key skills in the programme specifications, and promote their value to students; deliver, with the Careers Service, a careers and employability programme within and/or parallel to the curriculum; encourage application and use of personal and career development planning processes through LEAP, and particularly: make explicit, with examples, how discipline and generic intellectual/cognitive and key skills are required for success in both academic courses and career jobs; describe, with examples, how skills developed through student jobs and leisure activities complement academic skills and why they are required by employers; promote actively the benefits of developing knowledge, skills and personal qualities through paid and voluntary jobs and placements, drawing on Careers Service resources to help students find opportunities; ensure that each student produces a CV in each year of study, within a structure which identifies skill gaps. Careers Service assistance is available to: Colleges for LEAP and in College recommended additional activities; the Careers Service will allocate a careers adviser to liaise with each College (resources permitting);

Section 7

149

students and graduates through the Careers Services premises and through e-guidance; employers and other recruiters.

It is each students responsibility to: make appropriate use of the resources and mechanisms provided by the University; manage their own career development; use career and personal development planning resources. The University recognises that collaboration between academic departments and employers can enhance CEIAG provision, and Colleges are encouraged to develop long-term and formal links with employers independently and through the Alumni Office. Careers Service staff are provided with the skills, knowledge and training appropriate to the role they are undertaking, and all ALC staff are expected to gain appropriate professional qualifications. To support academic staff, the Careers Service will provide advice and Internetbased information resources to support the LEAP process. 7.13 SUPPORT FOR ACADEMIC STAFF DEVELOPMENT

7.13.1 Gaining Teaching Skills The Staff Development Unit (SDU) provides resources for academic staff to maintain and enhance their teaching and learning support skills. All new teaching staff, who have not previously received training related to teaching, are require to attend a training course in their first year. From September 2009 the required training will be the M-Level postgraduate certificate programme, Teaching in Higher Education (the tHE Programme). This HEA accredited scheme, leading to Fellowship of the Academy, will also be approved as a postgraduate certificate of Swansea University. The programme is also accredited by the Nursing & Midwifery Council. Swansea University is running the programme in collaboration with the universities of Aberystwyth, Bangor, Lampeter and the University of Wales Institute Cardiff. Provision is also made to support postgraduates gaining demonstrator or tutorial duties in the form of a short introduction to teaching course. Mentoring and Probation A mentoring scheme exists for all probationary staff. Effective monitoring procedures are in place for probationary staff and the Probationary Sub-Committee of the Academic Staffing Committee oversees these. Training is offered to staff acting as mentors, both in the standard form and in the enhanced teaching development functions under the new teaching programme.

150

Section 7

7.13.2 Supporting Existing Staff In addition to providing training for new staff, the SDU provides a broad programme of continuing professional development training related to teaching and learning skills. While a significant part of the support programme is aimed squarely at enhancing the quality of teaching and supporting research work, the Unit also provides special student support sessions dealing with disability and mental health. Again, equal opportunities, race and disability form a central and where possible embedded - strand of the training provided. Peer Review The Learning and Teaching Committee recommends as good practice that all Colleges have an effective system of peer review of the teaching quality of its staff. To support this recommendation the Unit has reviewed a number of different Peer Review of Teaching models and a specific model has been recommended to the Colleges (see Appendix 12). The Unit is undertaking a survey of the current use and extent of peer review in the Colleges of the University in 2010/11.

Section 7

151

[page left intentionally blank]

152

Section 7

SECTION 8: OTHER UNIVERSITY PUBLICATIONS AND DOCUMENTS

INTRODUCTION This section gives details of other Swansea University publications and documents that relate to or contain information about academic quality and standards. The list of publications and documents is comprehensive, but is not exhaustive. Details are given of the general contents of each publication, its principal readership, its authorship, and where members of the University may obtain copies and/or further information. Publications are listed in alphabetical order. Web Based Guidance: Contents: SWANSEA UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC GUIDE Contains details of all matters relating to the academic career of all students at the University. This includes an introduction to the structure of the University, an explanation of programmes structures, details of administrative procedures and student responsibilities, details of assessment issues, guides for research students and the full regulations for all Swansea University programmes of study. All Students and Academic Staff Academic Registry Academic Registrar ADMISSIONS SELECTORS HANDBOOK Contains information relating to procedures and processes for the admission of students to the University. Also contains a Good Practice guide for the admissions process. Admission Selectors; other members of academic staff. The Admissions Office The Admissions Officer

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details: PUBLICATION: Contents:

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details:

Section 8

153

PUBLICATION:

APPROVING STUDY

NEW

TAUGHT

PROGRAMMES

OF

Contents:

Contains a summary of the procedures for validating a programme to be delivered at Swansea University, provides directions for accessing the required proformas and guidelines in the design and evaluation of new programme proposals. Validation Panels, Administrators servicing Validation Panels, external assessors. The Academic Registry Academic Registrar, Academic Registry ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS FOR POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT AWARDS Contains full details of the regulations, procedures and structures relating to assessment and examination of University postgraduate modular degrees, certificates and diplomas. All academic staff; postgraduate students. Academic Registry Assistant Registrar (Taught Programmes Office)

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details: PUBLICATION:

Contents:

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details:

PUBLICATION:

GUIDANCE FOR EXTERNAL EXAMINERS FOR INITIAL UNDERGRADUATE AND TAUGHT POSTGRADUATE PROGRAMMES Contains the Swansea University Regulations for External Examiners, Undergraduate/Postgraduate Taught Assessment Regulations, University Regulations, Appeals Procedures and Unfair Practice Procedures. External Examiners, College Examination Officers Academic Registry Academic Registry GUIDANCE NOTES FOR COLLEGE EXAMINATION OFFICERS A practical handbook designed primarily for new College exams officers outlining their role in examination administration, liaison with the Exams Office and with external examiners. The handbook has a broad timetable of duties throughout the year.

Contents:

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details: PUBLICATION:

Contents:

154

Section 8

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details: Web Based Guidance:

College Examination Officers Academic Registry Andrea Wilcox, Administrative Officer GUIDANCE ON THE INTRODUCTION AND ONGOING MANAGEMENT OF COLLABORATIVE PROGRAMMES These guidance documents can be found at http://www.swan.ac.uk/registry/ExchangeMobilityOffice/C ollaborativeProvision/ and contain advice and guidance on introducing and managing collaborative and franchised activities both within and with Swansea University. Anyone interested in developing/ managing collaborative programmes Academic Registry Assistant Registrar (Collaboration) responsible for

Contents:

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details: PUBLICATION: Contents:

INTERNATIONAL STUDENT HANDBOOK A comprehensive guide for international students prior to departure from their home country. All international students International Student Advisory Service, Student Services Manager, International Student Advisory Service, Student Services PERSONAL TUTORS HANDBOOK The handbook contains an account of the Universitys Personal Tutor System and is intended to guide, support and inform members of staff undertaking this important role. The handbook brings together policies, processes and procedures together with sources of further guidance and support. The Handbook is also intended to raise awareness of the various support services that exist to help students, both within and outside of the University. Academic Staff Academic Registry Deputy Academic Registrar

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details:

PUBLICATION: Contents:

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details:

PUBLICATION: Contents:

COLLEGE HANDBOOKS Contains all details relating to a College, or other academic unit of the University. This includes general

Section 8

155

information such as staff listings and College facilities, as well as detailed information such as details of modules available within the individual subject areas. A template for the Handbook is provided by the Academic Registry. Principal Readership: Students studying modules or programmes of a College, in particular new students to the University/College or subject area. Colleges Heads of Colleges SWANSEA UNIVERSITY DIARY Containing key contact information for central administrative departments and providing date and month specific information related to the academic year and student life. New Students on arrival Student Services Director of Student Services SWANSEA UNIVERSITY FINANCIAL CONTINGENCY FUND Information and criteria to apply for financial assistance. All registered full/part time and undergraduate/ postgraduate students. Money Advice & Support Office, Student Services Manager, Money Advice & Support Office, Student Services UNDERGRADUATE ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS Contains full details of the regulations, procedures and structures relating to assessment and examination of University undergraduate modular degrees. These include the Structure of Examination Boards, Rules for Progression and the method of classification of Honours Degrees. All academic staff; undergraduate students. Academic Registry Assistant Registrar (Taught Programmes Office)

Published by: Further Details: PUBLICATION: Contents:

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details: PUBLICATION:

Contents: Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details:

PUBLICATION: Contents:

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details:

156

Section 8

PUBLICATION: Contents:

UNIVERSITY UNDERGRADUATE PROSPECTUS Details relating to the University, its programmes of study, its social life and location. Prospective Students and Careers Officers Marketing Department Director of Marketing UNIVERSITY POSTGRADUATE PROSPECTUS Details relating to the University, its programmes of study, its social life and location. Prospective Students and Careers Officers Marketing Department Director of Marketing

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details: PUBLICATION: Contents:

Principal Readership: Published by: Further Details:

Additional Information available from Student Services: New Student Information Flyers A Guide to the Student Counselling Service Money Advice and Support Office Swansea University Financial Contingency Fund International Student Advisory Service (ISAS) International Student Advisory Service (ISAS) Information Leaflets Disability Office Information Leaflets Under Pressure Race Relations and You Sports Centre Tuition Fee Guide Accommodating Success (Accommodation Guide) International Students Accommodation Explained Seaside Living (Accommodation Open Day leaflet) After the 1st year (Private sector information)

Section 8

157

Appendix 1a: College Duties in New Programme Development

Appendix 1b: University Process Validations

APPENDIX 2 PROCEDURE FOR AGREEING FACILIATION ARRANGEMENTS

Initial Expression of Interest

No

IDO Preliminary Review & Research including informal discussions with relevant Colleges and Admissions.

Possible yes

Proposal to Steering Group (Chair of SG for executive action) for review and decision on whether to support link Part 1
Set up & Approval of arrangeme nt

No

Yes

College Support IDO to inform party requesting link.

No

Yes

Interested Schools to fill in facilitation form.

Generic MOU drafted and signed.

Each facilitation form to be signed off by: 1) College 2) Head of Admissions Office 3) Director of Finance (if there bursaries involved) 4) Academic Board (Postgraduate Research) (if link at Research level) 5) IDO who will notify partner institution. 6) Academic Registrar who will record the information on the central database.

Signed MOU forwarded to Academic Registrar for recording in central database and reporting to Collaborative Provision C itt

Part 2 Monitoring of Arrangement

IDO/ Admissions Committee to track promotional development of link

(through reviewing on an annual basis the number of students received under link and progress thereof. Figures to be reported to Steering Group & Collaborative Provision Committee as part of the monitoring process of all agreements.) Where an agreement is not successful/ renewal of agreement will not be permitted and where appropriate action will be taken to terminate the existing agreement.

APPENDIX 3

Awards of Swansea University Senior Doctorates DSc DLitt LLD Doctor of Science/Doethur mewn Gwyddoniaeth Doctor of Letters/Doethur mewn Lln Doctor of Law/Doethur yn y Gyfraith

Professional Doctorates DNursSci EngD Doctor in Nursing Science/Doethur mewn Gwyddor Nyrsio Doctor of Engineering/Doethur mewn Peirianneg

Doctoral Level (CQFW credit level 8) MD PhD Doctor of Medicine/Doethur mewn Meddygaeth Doctor of Philosophy/Doethur mewn Athroniaeth

Masters M Level (CQFW credit level 7)

MPhil MRes MA MBA MSc LLM

Master of Philosophy/Meistr mewn Athroniaeth Master of Research/Meistr mewn Ymchwil Master of Arts/Meistr yn y Celfyddydau Master of Business Administration/Meistr mewn Gweinyddu Busnes Master of Science/Meistr mewn Gwyddoniaeth Master of Laws/Meistr yn y Cyfreithiau

Advanced Initial Degree (CQFW credit level 7) MEng MMath MPhys MOst GradDip PGDip PGCert Master of Engineering/Meistr mewn Peirianneg Master in Mathematics/Meistr mewn Mathemateg Master in Physics/Meistr mewn Ffiseg Master of Osteopathy/Meistr mewn Osteopatheg Graduate Diploma/Diploma i Raddedigion Postgraduate Diploma/ Diploma l-raddedig Postgraduate Certificate/ Tystysgrif l-raddedig

Honours H Level (CQFW credit level 6) BA BA Ord BEng LLB BMid BN BSc Bachelor of Arts/Baglor yn y Celfyddydau Bachelor of Arts (Ordinary)/Baglor yn y Celfyddydau (Cyffredin) Bachelor of Engineering/Baglor mewn Peirianneg Bachelor of Laws/Baglor yn y Cyfreithiau Bachelor of Midwifery/Baglor mewn Bydwreigiaeth Bachelor of Nursing/Baglor mewn Nyrsio Bachelor of Science/Baglor mewn Gwyddoniaeth

Intermediate I Level (CQFW credit level 5) DipHE Diploma of Higher Education/Diploma Addysg Uwch

Certificate C Level (CQFW credit level 4) HECert Certificate of Higher Education/Tystysgrif Addysg Uwch CERT FOUNDATION Foundation Year Certificate/Tysty

Appendix 4: Terminating and Suspending Programmes

Appendix 5: Nomination of External Examiners

APPENDIX 6
AN OUTLINE OF THE LINKS BETWEEN AMMP AND PERIODIC REVIEW AND CAUSE FOR CONCERN AUDIT

Link Possible Link AMMP1 Action Plans at programme level for Boards of Studies/College Learning and Teaching.

Periodic Review Action Plan for implementation by programme directors/Boards of Studies/College Learning and Teaching.

College/subject Audit Action Plan for implementation at relevant level

Tier Three

AMMP2 Action plan at College level for crossschool issues

Action plans addressed implemented and monitored at College Level.

Admin pre-checks on quality of submission Academic Board oversight/monitoring Meeting of the Academic Boards

Action plans addressed implemented and monitored at College Level.

Tier Two

Univ RQSC reviews institutional issues

Univ RQSC reviews institutional issues

Formal reporting of issues and intended actions to Univ RQSC. Monitoring occurs here?

Tier One

Appendix 7: External Examiners Reports Process

APPENDIX 8
PROCESS FOR DEALING WITH PROFESSIONAL BODIES REPORTS
College informs Quality Office of any Accreditation visits

Receipt of Professional Body Reports (by College)

Report considered and response issued (by College)

Accreditation Granted (by Professional Body)

Head of College to provide Quality Office with a short report, (proforma on Intranet), and copy of Professional Body Report

Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee to consider Professional Body Reports and short reports from Heads of Colleges Academic Boards to monitor any action points to be included in future AMMP proformas

Notes Professional Body Reports to be considered as key source of material in a lighter touch periodic programme review

Examples of good practice disseminated

APPENDIX 9
RECORD OF SUPERVISION
This sheet must be brought to each supervision and submitted with the completed Dissertation (to be completed as appropriate by student and supervisor at the end of each supervision session, and initialled by both as being an accurate record. NB it is the students responsibility to arrange supervision sessions and he/she should bear in mind that staff will not be available at certain times in the summer) Student Name: Student Number: Dissertation Title: Supervisor: Supervision Date, duration Notes Initials Initials NB:

Supervisor student

1: Brief outline of research question and preliminary title (by pre June) 2: Discussion of detailed plan and bibliography (by June) 3: Progress report, discussion of draft chapter (by August) 4: (optional) progress report (by September) 5: Submission (by 15/10/10)*

Statement of originality I certify that this dissertation is my own work and that where the work of others has been used in support of arguments or discussion, full and appropriate acknowledgement has been made. I am aware of and understand the Universitys regulations on plagiarism and unfair practice. Signed: ......................................................... Date: ................ ..

* For full-time students who commence their studies in the 2010/11 academic th session, the deadline for submission will be September 30 2011.

APPENDIX 10
CEIAG / LEAP POLICIES: THE CAREERS AND EMPLOYABILITY SERVICE Careers & Employability within Library and Information Services is aligned with learning support through the Universitys CEIAG and LEAP Policies and is represented on the Learning and Teaching Committee. This service works synergistically with other LIS teams in areas that include IT systems development, E-learning and Information Literacy, and the Head of Careers & Employability reports to the Director of LIS. Careers and Employability is a hub that pulls together all the threads of the student experience relating to employability in order to promote awareness of relevant issues and develop opportunities, and works closely with the Universitys management and academic staff as well as employers to achieve this. Careers and Employability is funded mainly by the University and receives additional external funding as follows: The GO Wales (Graduate Opportunities Wales) programme receives funding from the Welsh Assembly Government via HEFCW to provide work experience placements and work tasters; through the work placements students can gain formal recognition of their personal and professional development via the City & Guilds Professional Development Award. Under the South West Wales Higher Education Partnership (SWWHEP) , The Careers services at Swansea University, Swansea Metropolitan University and Trinity University College, Carmarthen undertake collaborative work to provide enhanced support for the development of students employability and skills, foster more effective engagement with local and national employers, and extend their use of technology to provide interactive online services. Through the HEFCW funded Employer Support Initiative a Careers Adviser is available to provide guidance support for unemployed and under employed graduates.

Careers and Employability has the following main client groups: Students and graduates of Swansea University University academic and administrative departments Employers Students and graduates are provided with information, advice and guidance services which can be summarised as follows: Internet and paper based information resources on career options, career management skills, the job market and further study Interactive online services such as E-guidance, online booking for careers events and eportfolio software Individual advice and guidance from careers advisers and other staff Part-time, term-time, vacation employment and placement opportunities An annual programme of employers presentations Am annual Employer Fair Support and guidance in recruitment and selection techniques Academic Collegess and Subjects receive advice and support from Careers in respect of: Developing Collegess employability policies in line with the Universitys overall LEAP Policy Strategies for embedding students skills development in the curriculum,

Careers talks/seminars for students video recordings and live talks, according to staff availability, Monitoring skills needs and trends in the graduate labour market in order to enhance the guidance offered to students and graduates.

Administrative Departments: the major formal activity is collection of the Destinations of Leavers of Higher Education, DLHE data; operational responsibility for collecting the data rests with ACU,(ACU will be merging with LIS before the end of 2010), guidance on coding is provided by Careers and Employability. Other partnerships include working with the Entrepreneurship Development team in the Colleges of Business and Economics and engaging with the Registry on a range of issues such as information provision, the Bologna Agenda and the Erasmus programme. The E Learning and PDP officer works closely with SALT. Employers: Careers and Employability works very closely with both local and national employers on a daily basis and provides a range of services including: Advertising vacancies Arranging work placements through the GO Wales programme An annual Careers Fair Providing facilities to interview job applicants

Links between employers and academic Collegess are encouraged wherever possible.

APPENDIX 11
CEIAG PROVISION The CEIAG, (Careers, Education, Information, Advice and Guidance) policy aims are to provide students with the opportunities to acquire and develop their knowledge, skills and qualities to: get their first graduate level job after graduation; use these attributes subsequently in the effective management and development of their career.

The CEIAG policy was updated in 2010. The policy now has increased emphasis on ensuring that CEIAG provision is even more student centred, and that CEIAG responsibility extends throughout the university. It is important that students are made aware of how the knowledge and skills acquired during their studies are linked to future career progression. CEIAG principles should be integrated more closely into the universitys overall strategy, not just the Learning and Teaching Strategy. Key student outcomes include: Knowledge about the graduate job market, about how organisations work, and about opportunities for graduates: Students will be expected to:

make use of the material available through the Careers and Employability Service which describes: the major types of employer in the private and public sectors; the functions of the typical departments in any employer; the interplay between organisations; trends in graduate employment and changes in the labour market; recognise that jobs consist of work tasks to be completed, each task requiring combinations of people and people skills; knowledge and knowledge-related skills; intellectual and key skills; personal qualities; use their own experience of employment to increase knowledge of these topics; apply research skills to analysing careers, jobs and other opportunities; be aware of the concept of networking and its value in supporting career development.

Knowledge, skills and personal qualities: Students will be expected to:

acquire and develop knowledge, skills and personal qualities through study, parttime and/or vacation work and extra curricular activities; be aware of the knowledge, intellectual skills, key skills, and personal qualities, which have developed as a result of their activities and experiences; understand how personal circumstances can influence career development; identify their strengths and weaknesses, and use LEAP materials and resources to improve their own learning.

Skills for the recruitment and selection process: Students will be expected to:

be aware of the principles of recruitment and selection, and the techniques used by graduate recruiters; evaluate jobs by identifying the work tasks and relating these to their knowledge, skills, personal qualities, and circumstances; identify information and illustrative examples of their knowledge, skills and personal qualities which demonstrate competence in the work tasks of a job; apply these principles to applications for academic and training courses and to research opportunities; commit the information and examples to application forms, curriculum vitae, and letters of application, in a style appropriate to the opportunity; gain experience of selection tests, presentations, individual exercises, and group discussion

APPENDIX 12
PEER OBSERVATION OR REVIEW OF TEACHING Oh would some power the gift would gie us, to see ourselves as others see us. Robert Burns Andrew Morgan Staff Development Unit September 2005 I was asked to review available models of Peer Observation of Teaching (POT) or Peer Review of Teaching (PRT) and make recommendations as to one or more effective and useful form(s) for possible adoption. In considering utility and value within a model that would genuinely contribute to student learning and staff development, I had five primary aims in view: 1. 2. 3. 4. and 5. Facilitating a record without introducing an unhelpful tension between peer support and performance management. Points 4 and 5 are vital. Attempts to adjust institutional cultures too easily fall prey to a mere increase in paperwork and, in review of the literature on this subject, the most common bugbear is a failure to sharply capture the first aim of any such programme to improve teaching and learning by wishing, alongside that, to permit a management perspective in terms of a mechanism for evaluation and reporting. Accordingly, Appendix 2 offers a double-sided report form that keeps the observation and discussion a matter for the peers while giving essential record, recommendation and report matters to the relevant internal body. METHODOLOGY Two optional formats can use the same methodology for observation, discussion and report:

Enabling reflective practice; Encouraging the dissemination of good practice; Seeking improvement and development in teaching methods and resources; Avoiding undue and unhelpful bureaucracy;

Paired colleagues: undertaking reciprocal observation. Groups of 5 or 6 in a School or subject - adding action-learning to observation by discussing results of observation and seeking to respond to those results.

The second format offers the most significant internal beneficial effect but requires a degree of confidence and commitment that may not be present in all academic areas at this time. A staged School development model could introduce POT via the first model with a view to moving to the second after a suitable settling-in period. It is useful if pairs change over a period to permit all parties a wider range of experience and feedback. (Some institutions use designated observers in a School or department or faculty and ask staff to sign up with that person for observation. That model ignores the fact that half the benefit of Peer Observation comes from being the observer!)

OBSERVATION IS UNDERTAKEN ACCORDING TO A STANDARD PATTERN:

Initial briefing to agree the timing for the observation and the areas for specific observation and comment; The Observation; Obtain feedback from students at the end of the observed session via CATs (see below); The Debriefing; Report.

EXPLAINING THE PROPOSED ELEMENTS: Initial discussion between the peers The initial briefing sets the parameters for observation, outlining the main details of the teaching session (level, topic, approaches and methods being employed, etc.) and providing the observer with points of reference and any areas that the teacher would like particular feedback on. The intended learning outcomes/objectives should be outlined, together with the planned structure of the session. The observation The observation is most effective when structured and a time-line of events and developments noted. (Most sessions include an introduction, a development section, a summing-up and a conclusion, with a note to students on work required or preparation needed for the next session.) A noted danger, for the observer, is neatly termed going native: this happens when the observer is drawn into the content rather than remaining in an observatory role. It is a particular danger when, as is most usual, the observer and the teacher are from the same discipline. The observers aims should be to provide a report to the teacher that would normally include the following: 1. Clarity of objectives/outcomes 2. Planning, organisation and structure 3. Content (currency, accuracy, relevance, use of examples, level in respect of student needs) 4. Methods/approach 5. Delivery and pace 6. Level of 'challenge' to students 7. Student participation & level of engagement 8. Use of resources: time, space, audience & equipment. Student Feedback: Classroom Assessment Techniques A very common indeed near universal weakness of the majority of POT/PRT approaches involves a failure to establish a baseline for observation by drawing on data provided by the common audience, the students. We cannot ask them to act as observers they lack the subject expertise and the necessary experience. We can, however, obtain extremely useful feedback via a number of easy, time-cheap, mechanisms: Classroom Assessment Techniques. These are not session, let alone module, evaluation methods; they supply a fast review and

report of learning assessments that provide valuable some say vital information about what has or has not - been learned during a given session. The simplest of these involves posing a single question in the last five minutes of the session and asking the students to write their answer on a piece of paper with they leave on the desk nearest the door as they exit. The technique is called, Muddiest Point. The question asked is: What was the muddiest point in this session? (In other words, what idea was least clear to you at the end of the session?) This and another useful technique is given in full in, below (Appendix 1). It takes only a few minutes to go through the replies of even a large class to establish points of weakness in the presentation on that particular session. The points are useful meat for the post-observation debriefing. Debriefing session In providing feedback on the session the observer must first allow the teacher to give her/his comments on the session. There may have been some unexpected or unusual aspects or developments during the session and this is important for framing the post-observation discussion. The review of the students responses to the Muddiest Point or the One Minute Paper allows a degree of triangulation between the observer, the teacher and the audience in terms of gaining an objective view of areas in the session where explanations and teaching forms were less successful and, combined with the Observers time-line of session development, will permit a useful consideration of what happened when and whether a different method or approach would be more successful in that context. This approach also allows the mention of more ordinary and mundane but important aspects of the teachers methods, so, for example, comment on the use of visual aids, voice-projection or engagement with the audience. The Observer should follow the teachers comments on the session and the feedback from students via the Classroom Assessment Technique, with her/his feedback comments, - always lead with strengths before considering issues relating to points for development or improvement. The Report The available literature strongly supports the conclusion that POT is most useful and effective when confidence between peers is maintained and the primary purpose of improving students learning by improving teaching methods and approaches is retained. The form proposed below (Appendix 2) permits a report to go to the relevant chair of the learning and teaching committee that will include information of record concerning the observation and, where the parties agree, useful general information about best practice or facilities can be added to inform peers and future practice. The main section of the report is retained by the teacher and by the observer, and both should respect the confidentiality of the process. Some Schools and teachers may prefer to separate the forms to have two sheets, one to record the reporting element and the other - to be retained by the observed teacher, recording points of observation and discussion.

Appendix 1

The Muddiest Point

What was the muddiest point in this session? (In other words, what idea was least clear to you at the end of the session?)

Reference: Dr. Fredrick Mosteller. The Muddiest Point in the Lecture as a Feedback Device in On teaching and Learning: The Journal of the Harvard-Danforth Centre, Vol. 3, April 1989.

The Minute Paper

Please answer each question in 1 or 2 sentences:

1)

What was the most useful or meaningful thing you learned during the session?

2)

What question(s) remain uppermost in your mind as we end this session?

Reference: Angelo, T.A. & Cross, K.P. Classroom Assessment Techniques: A handbook for College Teachers, 2nd. Edition. San Fransico: Jossey-Bass, 1993, pp. 148-153

Appendix 2

Observation of Teaching Observation & Report Form

Please complete this page and discuss it with the observer before the session.
What are the objectives planned for this session (e.g. knowledge and understanding, key skills, cognitive skills, and subject specific including practical/professional skills)?

On what particular things would you like feedback? 1

On completion, please cut off this portion and return to Chair of School Teaching & Learning Committee
School/Department/Unit
Type of activity, e.g. Lecture, Seminar

Programme

Session Length

Module/course unit & Level/year

Number of students

Date of Observation OBSERVERS NOTES Session Time-Line (Methods used or activity adopted at different times in the session.)

Points noted for discussion 1

Name of Observer

Name of Observed

Note of any recommended good practice approach or method.

Note of concern relating to accommodation or equipment.

APPENDIX 13
TIMETABLE FOR MONITORING/REVIEW EVENTS (a) Annual Timetable July - August External Examiners Reports normally received in Academic Registry and circulated to Colleges for comments College responses to External Examiners reports submitted to Academic Registry. UCAS, Admissions and Publications must be advised of any new or amended programmes that will be offered in 2012 or later. October Recommended deadline for completing AMMP1 Proformas for programmes completing in June. Academic Boards consider External Examiners report forms and College responses (mostly UG and programmes with June end-dates). October Oct 31st deadline for submitting UG AMMP1 and AMMP2 proformas to Quality Office Academic Board (UG) review AMMP1 and AMMP2 submissions for cross institutional perspectives. Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee reviews Reports from Academic Boards on institutional issues arising from external examiners reports. December Dec 15th deadline for external examiners reports on PGTM programmes Dec 31st - Recommended deadline for completing AMMP1 Proformas for programmes ending after June, including PGTM. January 1 Deadline for advising Academic Registry of any new/amended regulations. Deadline for Colleges to submit AMMP 1 and AMMP2 proformas for the 2010/11 session (evidence of annual programme monitoring) for programmes completing after June, esp PGTM programmes. External Examiners Digest normally finalised and circulated now. SALT to promulgate good practice. Academic Board (PGTM) review AMMP1 and AMMP2 submissions for cross institutional perspectives.

September 30

November

January 15

Feb

Feb - April

Validation Meetings involving approval by the external subject specialist must occur prior to May in the year in which the programme will be offered. AMMP procedures to be reviewed.

June

Academic Boards to consider reports from Colleges on periodic programme reviews, including identification of best practice. Regulations, Quality and Standards Committee will review reports on professional body reviews. Learning and Teaching Committee to promote quality enhancement of learning, teaching, assessment and of the student experience.

(b)

Periodic Programme Review

The following Colleges (and constituent subject areas) shall undergo periodic review in the 2010/11 session: Computer Science College of Human and Health Science - Social Work (combined with professional body review) Awards in DACE BA Humanities, MA in Lifelong Learning, MA Education. Humanities programmes in College of Arts and Humanities (TBC)

(d) External QAA Institutional Review The University underwent an extremely positive Institutional Review in the 2007/08 session. There will be a mid-cycle review in June 2011. The next full review is scheduled for the 2013/2014 session.

APPENDIX 14
WEB LINKS TO GUIDANCE AND PROFORMAS ON THE INTRANET Below are links to proformas and guidance on the Universitys Intranet (https://intranet.swan.ac.uk/login/) referred to in the text of this Manual. 1 Programme Creation Site (this link may work better if already logged on to the Intranet): https://intranet.swan.ac.uk/ASPX/schemecreation/Index.aspx The following forms may be found in the Sharepoint directory at http://bit.ly/gTr62b (currently accessible through usual University staff login): 2 3 REG-REQ FORM Guidance and Proforma for the Nomination of External Subject Specialist See TQM Section 3 Proposal for New Collaborative Agreement Template for Facilitating Admission Agreement Learning/Training Contract Placement Learning Handbook Template Work placement training agreement ECTS Learning Agreement Adding an additional year to an approved programme Module Proforma 2010-11 Nomination of External Examiner INITIAL Nomination of External Examiner TAUGHT MASTERS Nomination of External Examiner NURSING Module Review Template for Responding to the ARQUE Module Report AMMP1BoS Report Proforma 2009-10 AMMP2 School Learning and Teaching Committee Synopsis Proforma 2009-10 NSS School Response Proforma AMMP4 Key Data Sources

4 5 6a 6b 6c 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

17 18

19 20 21 22 23 24 25

School Response Form to External Examiners Report PPR1 Programme Review Proforma PPR3 Criteria for Appointment of External Assessor PPR3b Nomination form for External Assessor PPR4 External Assessors Evaluation School Response Form to Professional Body Report International Students

Section 8