CONFIRMED
ACADEMIC BOARD
Minutes of the meeting of the Academic Board held at 2.00 pm on Wednesday 3 November 2010 in room RB.1.04 on the Stratford Campus
Present: Professor Patrick McGhee (Vice-Chancellor) (Chair), Liz Attree (Undergraduate Programme Leader, School of Psychology), Julie Baldry-Currens (Director of Learning, Teaching and Assessment), Rabih Bashroush (Senior Lecturer, School of Computing, Information Technology and Engineering), Ravinder Bassi (Quality Assurance Officer), John Burr (Field Leader, School of Computing, Information Technology and Engineering), Ruth Carter (Head of Quality Assurance and Enhancement), Peter Cobb (Acting Dean of the School of Architecture and the Visual Arts), Olivia Corcoran (Senior Lecturer, School of Health and Bioscience), David Cosford (Director of Sport), Graham Curtis (Acting Pro-Vice-Chancellor and Dean of the School of Combined Honours), Mohammad Dastbaz (Dean of the School of Computing, Information Technology and Engineering), Mark Davies (Dean of the School of Psychology), Gregor Eglin (Principal Lecturer (Royal Docks Business School), Fiona Fairweather (Dean of the School of Law), Nesrin Gokcen (Student Representative), Paul Gormley (Field Leader, School of Humanities and the Social Sciences), Jeremy Hanshaw (International Office), Neil Herrington (Principal Lecturer, Cass School of Education), John Joughin (Deputy Vice Chancellor), Samantha Milne (Quality Assurance Officer), Vusa Nkomo (Student Representative), Helen Powell (Senior Lecturer, School of Humanities and Social Sciences), Neville Punchard (Dean of the School of Health and Bioscience), Adrian Renton (Professor of Health and Human Potential), Len Shackleton (Dean of the Royal Docks Business School), Ann Slater (Dean of the Cass School of Education), Robert Simpson (Field Leader, Cass School of Education), John Strawson (Reader, School, of Law), Carolyn Silberfeld (Senior Lecturer, Cass School of Education), Renee Tobe (Subject Director, Architecture), Joanne Tocher (Research Fellow, School of Health and Bioscience), Steven Trevillion (Dean of the School of Humanities and Social Sciences) and Louise Wielandt (Student Representative)
In attendance: Selena Bolingbroke (Acting Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Strategic Planning and External Development), Jill Grinstead (Interim Secretary and Registrar), Andrew McDonald (Director of Library and Learning Services), David Woodhouse (Assistant University Secretary)
Officer: Jane Thomas (Senior Administrator, Vice-Chancellor’s Group)
Apologies: Martin Barrett (Programme Leader, School of Architecture and the Visual Arts), Adrienne Clarke (Director of the International Office), Neil Cole (Corporate Marketing), Pippa Dell (Field Leader, School of Psychology), Brian Hipkin (Director of Student Services), Sharon Levy (Field Leader, School of Law), Siraj Sait (Reader, School of Law), John Shaw (Pro Vice Chancellor International), Alan White (Director of Graduate School), John Sparrowhawk (Field Leader, Royal Docks Business School), Ray Wilkinson (Acting Director of External and Strategic Development Services), Richard Zheng (Director of Knowledge Transfer)
10/01 MINUTES
01/01 RECEIVED and APPROVED: the minutes of the meeting held on 2 June 2010 with the amendment that Neil Cole, Helen Powell, Ann Slater and Renee Tobe be included in the list of those present
01/02 RECEIVED and APPROVED: the minutes of the meeting held on 30 June 2010 with the amendments that John Strawson should be listed as present and Ann Slater be included in the list of apologies.
10/02 MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
02/01 STANDARDISED REFERENCING: CLARIFYING OUR APPROACH TO HARVARD REFERENCING (minute 82/02)
02/02 NOTED: that Psychology was exempt from referencing because they work to a different set.
10/03 CONSTITUTION AND MEMBERSHIP
03/01 NOTED: a welcome was extended to the new members of Academic Board, Rabih Bashroush, John Burr, Nesrin Gokcen, John Joughin, Vusa Nkomo, Louise Wielandt. It was noted that Jill Grinstead, the Secretary and Registrar, was now included in the membership as “in attendance” at the Academic Board.
10/04 QUALITY AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE
04/01 RECEIVED: the amended Terms of Reference for the Quality and Standards Committee.
04/02 NOTED: that it was proposed that an amendement should be included to the Terms of Reference for the Quality and Standards Commitee to state that the Committee would receive and consider reports, rather than just monitor them.
04/02 AGREED: the proposed amendments to the Terms of Reference to the Quality and Standards Committee were agreed.
10/05 JOINT STUDENT STAFF CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
05/01 RECEIVED: the Annual Report on the issues raised and addressed at the Joint Student Staff Consultative Committee
05/02 NOTED:
a) there were a number of issues which had been raised in the last academic year and taken forward to the student focus group. As a result, for example, it was noted that we now had common rooms on both campuses.
b) there was a need to ensure developments emanating from the group were communicated to students and that a wider awareness of the committee be developed.
c) it would be useful for the report to contain details of the timing of the Committee and how students could find out details of items discussed at the committee. It was suggested that a physical or virtual noticeboard be developed in order to disseminate the information, the new student magazine on the web was also suggested as a way of communicating information from the Committee.
d) in the future there would be a project looking at student and learning space.
10/06 STUDENT-FACING ASSESSMENT FEEDBACK CAMPAIGN
06/01 RECEIVED: a report from the Director of Learning and Teaching on the findings from the student facing Assessment Feedback campaign held in April 2010.
06/02 NOTED:
a) a student facing assessment feedback campaign had taken place in April 2010 in order to encourage students to talk to other students about the broader benefits of feedback on their work. The opportunity was used to obtain information from students and, although it was not a proper survey, it was an opportunity for students to feedback their views.
b) from the survey it was noted that only 35% of students felt that they always received feedback, although the type of assessment feedback experienced was inconclusive. Despite this, the most valued feedback was that given on an individual basis.
c) it had been suggested that the student feedback campaign be repeated in Semester B, but using a slightly different approach and using a video to capture views from students. A suggestion was made that the survey could be run through programmes and programme committees, whereby the programme leaders circulate the survey, thereby obtaining a more representative response.
d) it was noted that the outcomes of the survey could not be mapped to the National Student Survey and it was acknowledged that ways of addressing the problem of feedback was addressed, together with the issue of students not collecting feedback. It was acknowledged that ensuring students were interested and interacting with the processes were essential factors.
10/07 REPORT ON THE OUTCOMES OF THE NATIONAL STUDENT SURVEY 2010
07/01 RECEIVED: a report from the Acting Pro Vice Chancellor, Learning, Teaching and Student Experience summarising UEL’s National Student Survey Results for 2010.
07/02 NOTED:
a) in terms of overall satisfaction, the score for UEL had risen from 72% to 76%, which was an improvement, however, this was against the national average of 83%. There was a pattern throughout the report, however, in that there was a high level of variability between schools and even between subjects in the same schools. Overall International students were more satisfied in every way than home or EU students.
b) areas which had been identified as needing attention included academic support and organisation and management. It was noted that the student satisfaction survey was a critical area and that, although we were improving, we are still below the national benchmarks. Improvements in these areas would result in the overall satisfaction rating being raised.
c) part-time students were recognised as an important area in which work was needed to ensure that we were providing the right service to part-time students.
d) the importance of the qualitative data collected whilst the survey was being collated was recognised and it was noted that the student comments were received by UEL. It was agreed that it would be useful for this data to be sent to the Deans of Schools as a standard and for the Deans to ensure that the themes that were contained within the data were put forward for discussion in their schools.
e) the Vice Chancellor was pleased with the progress achieved and recognised the amount of work that was being undertaken in order to ensure continued improvements in the student experience.
07/03 AGREED: the qualitative data collected during the course of the student survey be sent to Deans of School and for Deans to ensure that the themes contained within the data are put forward for discussion in their Schools
10/08 QUALITY ENHANCEMENT REPORT
08/01 RECEIVED: a report from the Head of Quality Assurance and Enhancement summarising the approaches that UEL have taken in 2009/10 to secure improvements in the quality of learning opportunities, and the outcomes of this work.
08/02 NOTED:
a) that the report summarised the outcomes of the academic review and external examiner reports and highlighted areas of staff development and sharing best practice. However, it focussed more recently on programme lead training, which had added to the general sharing of good practice across the institution.
b) the common enhancement themes included (i) a focus on assessment and feedback, (ii) employability and volunteering and (iii) technological developments.
c) two new Student Liaison Officers had recently been appointed, one of whom was located on the Docklands Campus, the other on the Stratford Campus. Each Student Liaison Officer had a helpdesk for each school each week and worked closely with the students in each school and the students’ union. The importance of ensuring that these officers were widely publicised was acknowledged and ideas on how this could be achieved were welcome.
d) it was acknowledged that there was a tendency to underplay celebration and action was being taken to ensure that achievement was recognised. It was noted that a new Vice Chancellor’s Awards celebration was being held on 22 November in recognition of prize winning students.
10/09 SPORTS ELITE REPORT
09/01 RECEIVED: a report from the Director of Learning and Teaching on supporting elite athletes’ academic study policy
09/02 NOTED:
a) approval was sought for a new policy which would support students who are seeking to balance academic success with the demands of participation in sport as elite athletes. This fitted tightly into the strategic objective to be the best in London for sport by 2015.
b) the practice within the sector had been reviewed, with particular focus on this policy from Bath and Loughborough. As a result it had been possible to adapt their policy to fit our own needs and fit in with our current regulations.
c) the policy had been seen by the Regulations Committee and had been approved with some conditions and work had been undertaken to ensure the policy worked with postgraduates as well as undergraduates.
d) the importance of how higher education can support elite athletes in the UK was acknowledged. It was noted that UEL had 23 students of junior and senior International level. The policy would support the academic study of those falling within the scope of the policy whilst allowing them to realise their full sporting potential.
e) the potential for other comparable students who might legitimately need time off was recognised e.g. outstanding musicians and it was agreed that other these students’ circumstances could be looked at exceptionally on a case by case basis.
09/03 AGREED: that the policy would be approved, but the two recommendations from the Regulations Committee were endorsed and the policy should be reviewed after a year to ensure it was being used in the way it was intended.
10/10 INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT 2010
10/01 RECEIVED:
a) a report from the Quality Assurance Agency following the Institutional Audit of the University of East London in March 2010.
b) A report from the Head of Quality Assurance and Enhancement setting out the detail of the proposals to address the recommendations set out in the report of the Quality Assurance Agency.
10/02 NOTED:
a) ‘Confidence’ had been achieved in the management of both academic standards and quality. This was a great achievement. Four recommendations had been made covering the use of data, external examiner nomination procedures and preparation of research students for teaching roles. These are being addressed and progress will be monitored through QSC.
10/11 EMERITUS STAFF CONTINUING AS SUPERVISORS OF POSTGRADUIATE RESEARCH STUDENTS
11/01 RECEIVED: a report from the Director of the Graduate School proposing that emeritus staff be allowed to continue as supervisors of postgraduate research students.
11/02 NOTED: approval for a small amendments to Part 9 of the Manual of General Regulations was sought to enable people holding emeritus positions at UEL to continue as a supervisor.
11/03 AGREED: to endorse the proposal for an amendment to Part 9 of the Manual of General Regulations.
10/12 REACCREDITATIONS OF RESEARCH CENTRES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON
12/01 RECEIVED: a report from the Deputy Vice Chancellor reporting on the reaccreditation process for the latest research centres to undergo the process of review and reaccreditation.
12/02 NOTED: all Research Centres of the University of East London were obliged by the terms of reference for their establishment to undergo a triennial process of review and reaccreditation. Approval was sought from Academic Board to endorse the reaccreditations of eight research centres. It was noted that the recommendations had been considered by a small review panel and recommendations put forward by this panel had been reviewed by the Research and Knowledge Exchange Committee on 24 June 2010 and 30 September 2010.
12/03 AGREED: to endorse the reaccreditation of the Centre for Institutional Studies, the Centre for Narrative Research, the Centre for Social Work Research, the Family Therapy and Systemic Research Centre, the Raphael Samuel History Centre, the Rix Centre, the Matrix East Research Lab and the Continuum Research Centre as Research Centres of the University of East London.
10/13 SUSTAINABILITY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: REACCREDITRATION AS A RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON
13/01 RECEIVED: a report from the Deputy Vice Chancellor requesting approval for the Sustainability Research Institute to be reaccredited as a research institute of the University of East London