Anglia Polytechnic University

SEN/08/28

ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY

The Senate

Summary Report of the Annual Monitoring of Taught Pathways Delivered in the Academic Year 2006/07

1. Introduction

1.1 The purpose of this paper is to provide a summary to the Senate on the annual monitoring process for pathways delivered in 2006/07, conducted between September 2007 and March 2008.

1.2 The following reports are attached as Appendices 3 - 8 and were the main sources of information for the Summary Report:

 Five Faculty Board Overview Reports: Faculty of Arts, Law & Social Sciences (ALSS); Ashcroft International Business School (AIBS); Faculty of Education (FoE); Faculty of Health & Social Care (FHSC); Faculty of Science & Technology (S&T). All Overview Reports were approved by the relevant faculty boards at meetings held in February/March 2008;

 Annual Institutional Review of Edexcel Licensed Centre BTEC Programmes (this report forms the annual reporting process for Edexcel and complements the monitoring of Edexcel higher nationals within the Programmes undertaken as part of the Anglia Ruskin standard process).

1.3 The Senate is invited to consider this report, agree appropriate action where necessary and conclude the annual monitoring process of delivery in 2006/07. A summary of all recommendations contained with this report is attached as Appendix 2.

2. Process

2.1 For the third year running, the main structure and organisation of the annual monitoring process was largely unchanged; the main focus of the process was the Programme. Following feedback contained within the previous year’s five Faculty Overview Reports, the presentation of the main Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) template was revised for the 2006/07 cycle including the addition of new questions to encourage a greater emphasis on enhancement.

2.2 Three of the five Faculty Overview Reports for the monitoring of taught pathways in 2005/06 requested further support in engaging collaborative partner institutions in the annual monitoring process. To this end an ‘aide- mémoire’ was developed and used in this year’s process. This document was distributed to relevant colleagues at collaborative partner institutions via HE Co- ordinators. Its purpose was to provide early detailed guidance on the process to colleagues in partner institutions and to help them prepare their contribution to the relevant AMRs in order to facilitate the dialogue that would take place with the relevant Anglia Ruskin Programme Leader(s). In previous years, the emphasis had been placed on the Programme Leader to initiate contact and to gather this information. However, it was evident that the previous system was not overly successful in achieving the engagement of partner institutions. In the

Summary Report to the Senate 1 Annual Monitoring of Delivery in 2006/07 SEN/08/28

revised approach, overall responsibility for the production of the Programme AMR still resides with the Programme Leader.

Overall, the response from those faculties who commented on the introduction of the aide-mémoire in their Overview Reports has been positive. AIBS describes the document as “extremely helpful” and S&T reports that all its UK collaborative partner institutions provided appropriate and helpful information, in contrast to the previous year. ALSS notes reservations about the new approach and recommends that Programme Leaders and collaborative partners are surveyed about the usefulness of the aide-mémoire. The Quality Assurance Division will seek feedback on this new aspect of the process and make adjustments where necessary but it is recommended to the Senate that, based on generally positive feedback in its first year of operation, the use of the aide-mémoire is continued.

2.3 As in previous years, the Quality Assurance Division organised two briefing sessions, held in early September 2007, for those colleagues involved in the process. A total of 56 staff attended these sessions which were organised differently to previous years. During the planning stage, the Institutional Quality Assurance Officer enquired as to the exact areas on which those colleagues who would be attending would like the briefings to be focussed. This allowed the programme for the briefing sessions to be structured towards the delegates’ interests. In addition, exemplars of previous AMRs were provided. The briefings did not include timetabled sections on aspects of the process that have worked well in previous years and in which the colleagues attending did not feel any further information was required. As a consequence, once the main briefings were completed, a small group session (usually lasting an hour) was held for those Programme Leaders and HE Co-ordinators who were new to the process which enabled more interaction and individual advice and guidance. Feedback from delegates suggests that this approach was welcomed and seen as more constructive and the Quality Assurance Division will continue to use this approach in future years.

2.4 Analysis of the 25 evaluation forms completed by delegates (a disappointing response rate of 44.6%) showed that the sessions were described as ‘helpful’ (80.0% / 20 of respondents), ‘instructive’ (84.0% / 21) and ‘constructive’ (60.0% / 15). Three negative comments were made; two delegates judged the briefing sessions to be ‘difficult’ with one delegate describing them as a ‘waste of time’.

2.5 The main sessions were complemented by six further sessions (three per campus – ten fewer than in the previous year), delivered jointly by colleagues from C&ITS and the Head of Quality Assurance, dedicated to accessing and using the statistical data provided to support the annual monitoring process.

2.6 The revised approach to the briefing sessions and the need for fewer sessions to provide guidance on statistical issues is encouraging as it demonstrates that the annual monitoring process has become well established and understood by the staff involved. The Quality Assurance Division will consider the feedback from the evaluation forms carefully when preparing future staff development sessions.

2.7 In general, it can be reported to the Senate that the process in the year to which this report refers has operated smoothly and efficiently.

3. Conclusions

3.1 All five Faculty Board Overview Reports confirm that the annual monitoring process of the delivery of pathways in 2006/07 was conducted effectively and undertaken in a sufficiently critical and reflective manner.

3.2 All the faculties report that AMRs and Readers’ Reports for each Programme were received. With regard to the essential requirements of the annual monitoring process, two faculties did not indicate if these had been satisfied (AIBS and FoE). FHSC details one report where further information was required. It is recommended to the Senate that the relevant Associate Deans of Faculty (with responsibility for quality assurance) confirm to the Head of Quality Assurance that all essential requirements have been satisfied by Monday 5th May 2008.

3.3 The Overview Reports confirm that, in general, the action plans attached to the individual AMRs reflected the issues identified in the associated reports, were informed by statistical analysis (where appropriate) and followed the S.M.A.R.T. format although S&T highlights that some action plans were not S.MA.R.T. and generic in nature. ALSS notes that some plans can contain too many action points which it believes leads to plans which are not S.M.A.R.T..

Once again, the need for further training for colleagues who construct S.M.A.R.T. action plans is raised by the faculties in their Overview Reports. This has been a recurring theme in the briefing sessions for the last three years, including the use of an external facilitator on the issue (although, interestingly, the subject of S.M.A.R.T. Action Planning did not feature amongst the areas that delegates wished to see included in the new style briefing session). It is disappointing that this issue continues to be raised as an area of concern. However, the action plan is a fundamental outcome of the annual monitoring process, so will continue to be a major feature of the briefing sessions in the future.

A small number of action plans required amendment by the Faculty Board Annual Monitoring Subcommittees and, therefore, it is recommended to the Senate that the relevant Associate Deans of Faculty (with responsibility for quality assurance) confirm to the Head of Quality Assurance that all amended action plans have been received and approved by Monday 5th May 2008.

3.4 All the Overview Reports confirm that external examiners’ reports were generally positive and complimentary and were used effectively as part of the annual monitoring process. In general, responses to the reports had all been provided and S.M.A.R.T. Action Plans included reference to external examiners’ comments where applicable. FHSC and S&T report six external examiners who identified academic standards as being at risk (as reported to the Senate in November 2007) and confirm that actions have been taken to address these serious concerns.

3.5 All the Faculty Board Overview Reports confirm that the individual AMRs were informed by the statistical information provided to support the annual monitoring process. For the vast majority of cases, the centrally produced statistical data on module performance, continuation, retention and classifications was used. In some circumstances, it was supplemented by local data which provided further detail. AIBS and S&T report that the statistics are being used effectively

by AMR authors. FHSC notes that the statistical data helped to identify modules with lower than average mean marks, poor recruiting pathways and those with retention problems and, consequently, appropriate responses have been added to the relevant action plans.

The statistical component of the annual monitoring process, revised for last year’s process, appears to have become established in its second year with further comments in the Overview Reports of the improved quality and reliability of the data. There have certainly been fewer problems reported with regard to accuracy and accessibility. FoE indicates in its report that it wishes to incorporate the data (which is available at any time of the academic year) into its Faculty Management Group and Discipline Network Groups.

3.6 The AMR template for the delivery of pathways in the 2006/07 academic year asked for comment on the implementation of the new 15/30 credit curriculum. ALSS reports that the curriculum has been generally well received and has worked well with very positive comments from external examiners. Whilst AIBS confirms that its external examiners were pleased with the new provision, there was no formal comment from the School itself. FHSC highlighted the impact on students of the removal of the default third opportunity for re-assessment but did not request its re-introduction specifically. There was no comment on the 15/30 project in the FoE Overview Report.

3.7 A recurring theme identified through external examiners’ reports by the Faculty Board Overview Reports is the need to ensure consistency in the marking process. AIBS highlights the importance of this issue with regard to the expanding nature of Anglia Ruskin’s collaborative provision. Anglia Ruskin University’s Generic Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards were introduced in early 2007 (via the Procedural Document for the Senate Code of Practice on the Assessment of Students) for use from 2007/08 and were designed to help academic staff ensure transparency and consistency in the assessment process. Therefore, it is recommended to the Senate that Programme Leaders are asked to comment on the implementation and usefulness of Anglia Ruskin’s Generic Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards in the AMR for delivery of pathways in 2007/08, a summary of which will be reported in next year’s Summary Report to the Senate.

3.8 Last year’s Summary Report to the Senate noted one recurring issue which had been raised through external examiners’ reports on the academic year 2005/06 and on which the Senate agreed to require Programme Leaders to comment explicitly in this year’s AMRs (the template for which was amended to facilitate this):

 The quality of referencing by students in written work.

The five Faculty Board Overview Reports show that the issue has not re- emerged as an area of concern for external examiners in 2006/07. FHSC makes an explicit reference to on-going action within the Faculty to improving the level of referencing by students. It is recommended that this issue does not continue to require further explicit comment in future AMRs unless raised by other sources as part of the standard annual monitoring process.

3.9 In April 2007, the Senate agreed to continue to require Programme Leaders to comment explicitly in this year’s AMRs on three recurring issues raised through external examiners’ reports and the now discontinued University Assessor system, which were originally identified as part of the process for the monitoring of the delivery of pathways in 2004/05. From the Faculty Overview Reports, the following comments can be made:

(a) Ineffective communication with external examiners

The issue has not been identified by external examiners or AMR authors as a continuing area of concern in 2006/07. The outcomes of the service standard questionnaire completed by external examiners in each year show a 99.4% positive response rate in 2006/07 to the question on whether faculties and departments established effective communication. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue does not continue to require further explicit comment in future AMRs unless raised by other sources as part of the standard annual monitoring process.

(b) The need to identify and implement modern systems for the detection of plagiarism

AIBS and S&T report that the number of allegations of plagiarism continues to increase and that the use of automated electronic systems to help with detection would be welcomed (see paragraph 4.1.2 below).

(c) The need to continue to improve communication between Anglia Ruskin departments and collaborative partners

Anglia Ruskin’s current strategy of expanding its collaborative provision further emphasises the need to ensure good levels of communication. None of the Faculty Board Overview Reports identified this issue as a continuing problem. Indeed, AIBS and S&T comment positively on the matter. Therefore, it is recommended that this issue does not continue to require further explicit comment in future AMRs unless raised by other sources as part of the standard annual monitoring process.

3.10 All the Overview Reports confirm that all actions identified in the previous year’s S.M.A.R.T. Action Plans had either been completed or rolled forward for inclusion in the Action Plan for 2007/08, due to the medium-long term nature of the issue or where timescales required revision. S&T highlights one Reader’s Report where further action had been requested but no action had resulted and this is being followed up by the Faculty.

3.11 The five Faculty Overview Reports identified the following issues which require special attention during 2007/08:

 Management and supervision of major projects (AIBS)  Incorporating work placements into undergraduate pathways (AIBS)  Improving feedback to students on assessed work (AIBS)  Increased use of formative assessment (AIBS)

 Management of, and administrative arrangements for, expanded collaborative partnerships (AIBS and S&T)  Impact of staff sickness on retention and results from the National Student Survey (NSS) (FoE)  Modules with mean marks below 50% (FHSC)  Pathways with declining recruitment and retention (FHSC)  Improved level of return on module evaluation questionnaires (FHSC)  Sourcing of placement opportunities (FHSC)  Involvement of external examiners in practise based assessments (FHSC)  Improved level of participation of students and other stakeholders in Programme Subcommittees and other similar mechanisms (FHSC)  Staffing in the Department of the Built Environment (S&T)  Declining recruitment to pathways in the Department of Digital Sciences & Technology (S&T)  Laboratory provision and technical support (S&T)  Addressing problems with equivalency of achievement and experience of students studying the same modules at different locations within the UK (S&T)

3.12 There were no major issues of concern raised by any of the Overview Reports with regard to Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (PSRBs).

3.13 There were no major issues of concern raised by the Annual Institutional Review of Edexcel Licensed Centre BTEC Programmes report.

3.14 Overall, the Senate can be confident that the annual monitoring of the delivery of pathways in 2006/07 has been conducted effectively.

4. Issues of Institutional Significance

4.1 The following issues of institutional significance were reported:

4.1.1 The Overview Report from AIBS highlights concerns over inappropriate teaching accommodation and the lack of catering facilities available for students registered on professional pathways.

4.1.2 The Overview Reports from AIBS and S&T highlight further problems with detecting plagiarism and requests that further staff development is provided and that the default use of software such as ‘turn-it-in’ is introduced. Such a move would require re-consideration of the current policy which does not permit the electronic submission of student work for summative assessment purposes.

4.1.3 The Overview Report from S&T raises, once again, the need for institution-wide support for students with specific learning needs in written English, particularly with the current emphasis on the recruitment of international students.

4.2 It is recommended to the Senate that the above issues are reported to the relevant responsible managers and/or committees who are then required to provide a written response to the next meeting of the Senate (June 2008), detailing any action planned, or taken, to address these issues.

5. Examples of Good and Innovative Practice and Commendable and/or Significant Achievements for Wider Dissemination

5.1 Anglia Ruskin University defines good practice as:

"a method, strategy, system, procedure or process, which has, over an appropriate period of time, resulted in improved academic standards, an enhanced quality of education and/or an improved level of service to stakeholders (eg: students, staff, external examiners, collaborative partners, employers etc.) and which can, when appropriately adapted, be implemented in other areas of the institution."

Such good practice can be evidenced in a variety of ways. Examples include student performance, statistical information, feedback from stakeholders (ie: via questionnaires, Programme Subcommittee meetings, Employer Liaison Panel meetings etc.).

5.2 The Senate is invited to endorse the examples of good and innovative practice and commendable and/or significant achievements listed in Appendix 1 which shall then be disseminated to the wider Anglia Ruskin community with details of colleagues who can be contacted for further details. The information will be provided to all Deans and Associate Deans of Faculty, Directors of Studies, Heads of Department, Programme Leaders and HE Co- ordinators at collaborative partner institutions. In addition, the information will be received and considered by the Senate’s Learning & Teaching Committee and the Faculty Learning & Teaching Subcommittees.

5.3 Since the introduction, in 2005, of a definition for good practice, the number of examples listed in the five Faculty Overview Reports has decreased steadily as the five Faculty Annual Monitoring Subcommittees continue to discriminate between the numerous examples detailed in individual AMRs and those which are worthy of dissemination and, indeed, demonstrate genuine good practice from which others can learn and benefit. This is to be applauded as the listing of basic ‘standard’ practices experienced in the past has been reduced significantly, allowing colleagues across Anglia Ruskin and its collaborative partner institutions to focus on genuine examples of good and innovative practice.

5.4 As suggested by the ALSS Overview Report, it is recommended that INSPIRE selects a minimum of two of the examples of good and innovative practice identified in Appendix 1 and organises sessions to promote and disseminate the good practice as part of the 2008 Learning & Teaching Conference.

6. Further Enhancements and Amendments to the Future Process

6.1 As is normally the case, a number of comments have been returned via the Overview Reports and other informal sources about the main AMR template, the Reader’s Report template and the associated guidance notes. These are generally useful comments about wording and style which will be adopted for next year’s process. Areas for enhancement may include:

 Amending the template to make more explicit the requirement to comment on the system (agreed in January 2008 by the Academic

Standards, Quality & Regulations Committee) of the correlation of student satisfaction ratings (obtained from module evaluation questionnaires) and the mean marks of modules;  Responses at Programme level to the National Student Survey and Student Experience Survey;  Amending the template to make more explicit the need to outline the steps taken to disseminate outcomes of Programme Subcommittees, and other similar mechanisms, to the whole student body (not just student representatives);  The level at which staff have engaged with the Higher Education Academy Subject Centres, INSPIRE initiated activities and the Faculty Learning & Teaching Strategy;  The need of further guidance to Readers on the completion of their reports.

6.2 All the faculties are asked to comment in their Overview Reports on the statistical element of the process, including the extent to which AMR authors have used the statistical information provided to inform their evaluation and Action Plans. Early sections of this report have discussed the usefulness of the statistical data and how the faculties have used the information to inform individual AMRs.

It is pleasing to note that the use of the centrally produced data has increased further and that locally produced data is only being used to supplement the institutional level source or where AMRs serve a dual purpose with PSRBs (eg: Law Professional Courses) and other data sets are required.

Comments on the usefulness of the statistical data and suggestions for enhancement include the following:

6.2.1 ALSS and FHSC have suggested that module statistics are produced by Programme and Pathway respectively in addition to Department. The statistical reports are currently produced to reflect Anglia Ruskin’s curriculum management structures and, therefore, this is not possible currently. However, the Quality Assurance Division will explore the matter further with colleagues in C&ITS as the advantage of analysing module statistics in this manner is clear.

6.2.2 S&T has requested that the Programme level statistical reports include summary data from the previous year in order to allow comparisons. Separate reports for the previous year can be produced by users of the Oracle Portal but the Quality Assurance Division will explore the possibility of the summary data appearing in one single report with colleagues in C&ITS.

6.2.3 ALSS, AIBS and FHSC highlight the need for internal transfers from one pathway to another to be correctly represented.

6.3 Although there has been significant improvement in recent years, there are still examples of problems with accessibility to the Oracle Portal and Access Database which provide the pathway and module statistics respectively for the annual monitoring process. In the past, and as mentioned in paragraphs 2.5 - 2.6 above, additional training sessions on accessing and using the statistical data have been delivered. Due to staffing changes and expertise, it will no

longer be possible to deliver these sessions in future years on so many occasions. Consequently, it is recommended to the Senate that the Head of Quality Assurance should arrange for the main statistical reports to be downloaded and stored on a public electronic area, to be determined. This will allow quick and easy access to Programme Leaders and hopefully reduce the high number of queries on how to access the statistical data.

The current AMR template requires Programme Leaders to attach a number of appendices including the statistical reports. The purpose of attaching this data is to allow the Reader and, if necessary, the Faculty Board Annual Monitoring Subcommittee to consult the data in the later stages of the process. As the standard statistical reports will be stored electronically and can therefore be accessed by readers and members of the subcommittees, it is recommended to the Senate that the statistical reports are no longer appended to the AMR, thereby reducing the size of the complete AMR and reducing photocopying and other associated costs.

6.4 This year, the five Faculty Overview Reports have identified continued levels of satisfaction with the improvement in the level of accuracy of the statistical data. However it is clear that some errors continue to exist. During the summer of 2007, the Head of Quality Assurance convened a meeting to facilitate an investigation into the nature and sources of the perceived inaccuracies with the Programme level data with a view to enabling the resolution of the problems. Surprisingly, there were, in actual fact, few complaints about the accuracy of the data but more concern that errors identified by Programme and Pathway Leaders are going unreported to the University Registry and, therefore, are not corrected. The Head of Quality Assurance and Head of Student Records have held several meetings to progress this issue and will be delivering a session to colleagues in FHSC (on request) about the systems for correcting data in summer 2008. If successful, it is intended that all faculties can be included in future sessions.

6.5 At the beginning of each year’s annual monitoring process, Programme Leaders are reminded that they are able to access the annual monitoring statistics, together with a wide range of other pertinent reports, all year round. Unfortunately, a significant number of Programme and Pathway Leaders only choose to avail themselves of the various data reports in the autumn for the annual monitoring process. Like any other software application, infrequent use can lead to colleagues forgetting how to use the systems and, therefore, experiencing difficulties in accessing the data correctly (if at all) and overlooking the opportunity to identify inaccuracies.

A key responsibility of any Pathway and/or Programme Leader is to keep abreast of developments in the Pathway(s)/Programmes for which he/she has responsibility and the regular use of statistical data to aid the role is important. At present, the annual monitoring process appears to be the only formal occasion when many (but not all) staff have the opportunity to learn how to access the data and, due to pre-occupation at the time with the annual monitoring process, efforts are invariably concentrated on this procedure. It therefore also causes a bottle neck, as explained above, of staff wanting assistance with accessing data etc..

It is therefore recommended to the Senate that the Human Resources Department and C&ITS are asked to consider the possibility of offering regular (perhaps six monthly) training sessions for Pathway and

Programme Leaders which explore the wide range of statistical reports that are available and explain how they can be used and interpreted. It is hoped that this will encourage the relevant postholders to make frequent use of the information which will lead to: (i) a better understanding of the data as a result of the increased usage; (ii) ensure errors in data accuracy are reported more often and therefore increase the reliability of the information and; (iii) place less emphasis on the annual monitoring process as the time of year when statistics should be considered and peak levels of training are required.

6.6 FoE suggests in its Overview Report that consideration is given to starting the annual monitoring process earlier than is currently the case (report templates are usually available from August) with a view to setting an earlier deadline for the submission of AMRs. Unfortunately, in order to ensure the completeness of statistical data with assessment outcomes from the September (re)assessment period being included in the statistical reports, data cannot be effectively utilised until the beginning of October. There are elements of the process which do not rely on statistical information and the Quality Assurance Division always encourages colleagues to commence work on these aspects of the process before the statistical data is available. However, as September is an extremely busy period for all staff (eg: the induction of new students and assessment processes), it is unlikely that the process could take place earlier. It is agreed that this is a desirable goal and the various deadlines associated with the process will be reviewed when the next cycle is planned during early summer 2008.

6.7 The FHSC and S&T Overview Reports praise the use of tables detailing key issues from the Readers’ Reports, prepared by the Deputy Head of Quality Assurance, for the attention of the Faculty Board Annual Monitoring Subcommittees. The Quality Assurance Division will explore this approach further with a view to its use in all faculties from January 2009.

6.8 At the end of the 2007/08 academic year, Anglia Ruskin’s collaborative partnership with the Norwich School of Art & Design (NSAD) will come to an end as NSAD has secured its own taught degree awarding powers from September 2008. To date, NSAD has enjoyed delegated authority to manage its own annual monitoring process which culminates in the submission of a synoptic report to the ALSS Faculty Board Annual Monitoring Subcommittee. In order to facilitate the move to NSAD’s new status it is recommended to the Senate that the annual monitoring of NSAD pathways delivered in 2007/08 will be conducted under the auspices of NSAD only (ie: Anglia Ruskin will not include NSAD pathways in the annual monitoring process for 2007/08).

PAUL BAXTER Head of Quality Assurance

April 2008

Appendix 1 Examples of Good and Innovative Practice

Faculty of Arts, Law & Social Sciences

The use of assessed tutorials (Programme: Law (Academic Courses))

The use of portfolio-based assessment in the context of Law education where they are little used (Programme: Law (Academic Courses))

The integration of theory and practice in the learning and teaching methodology. The theory-practice link means that every practice module contains an element in which students are expected to draw directly on resources from theory modules (Programme: Communication, Film & Media)

The widespread use now being made of WebCT by highly research-active staff (Programme: English and Writing)

The pervasive use of WebCT, particularly in the CMT pathway (Programme: Music)

The ‘practical essay’; the External Examiner highlights as innovative practice the ‘practical essay’ which provides students with the opportunity to demonstrate the appropriate interpretation of theoretical materials in practical contexts. The essay is assessed at the point of delivery and is followed by a viva (Programme: Performing Arts)

The way in which PDP is integrated into a content module ‘History Today’ (Programme: Humanities)

The use of wiki in the module ‘Race, Racism and Cultural Identity’. Student handbooks and assignments for ‘Work based learning’ module (Programme: Social Sciences)

Ashcroft International Business School

External examiners have identified the following areas of good practice:

 innovative assessment and delivery methods (Programme(s): Unspecified)  application of theory to practice (Programme(s): Unspecified)  project based delivery and assessment (Programme(s): Unspecified)  excellent management and administration of the assessment process (Programme(s): Undergraduate, Postgraduate and Professional)  the external examiners’ review days (Programme(s): Undergraduate, Postgraduate and Professional)  campus based moderation days (Programme(s): Unspecified)  the close link to professional bodies in respect of the development, delivery, assessment of the curriculum (Programme(s): Unspecified)

The development of APL tariffs linking the curriculum for professional programmes to the undergraduate and postgraduate curricula to enable students to transfer from professional courses onto specific pathways without having to repeat learning. This

Summary Report to the Senate 11 Annual Monitoring of Delivery in 2006/07 SEN/08/28 has led to the development of international partnerships where top-up programmes will be offered to a large number of students (Programme(s): Unspecified)

The validation and of three undergraduate pathways which directly relate to practice based learning, which have been developed in conjunction with large corporate organisations (Barclays) (Programme: Undergraduate)

Validation of, and recruitment to, the first delivery of the “Certificate in Leadership” which provides a distance learning model whereby practitioners can learn in the workplace and study for an undergraduate qualification (Programme: Undergraduate)

The inclusion an open lecture series from visiting professors to enhance both the undergraduate and postgraduate curriculum (Programme: Undergraduate and Postgraduate)

Analysis of examples of previous assessments by new students, during the induction period, has been extended across the postgraduate programme area (Programme: Postgraduate)

The inclusion of “live case” studies based on research undertaken by staff teaching on the MBA, CIM and DMS (Programme: Postgraduate)

The inclusion of a “Dragons’ Den” event involving 6 local entrepreneurs, in the MBA pathway (Programme: Postgraduate)

Faculty of Education

Academic skills expectations paper (Programme(s): Combined Honours and Early Years)

Customised induction programme for PRC students organised by the library (Programme(s): Teaching Assistants)

Identification and use of external expertise to enhance teacher training experience (Programme(s): Primary and Secondary Postgraduate Initial Teacher Training, Primary Undergraduate Initial Teacher Training, Teaching Assistants)

Faculty of Health & Social Care (reporting on the former Institute of Health & Social Care and former Homerton School of Health Studies)

The involvement of users and carers in curriculum development and evaluation mechanisms (Programme: Acute Care and Pre-Registration Nursing)

Students being required to write a book chapter as an assessment task (Programme: Primary Care, Public Health & Social Policy (Cambridge))

Innovative development around the use of the extensive skills facilities and other strategies related to practice learning and assessment including expansion of the placement and interprofessional learning opportunities within the curriculum; 86% of FHSC students have said they would recommend their placements to another student (HSHS Synoptic Report)

The innovative nature of some aspects of assessment within the Faculty, e.g. patchwork texts have been commended by external examiners and presented to several Universities across the country (Programme: Advanced Practice & Research)

The inclusion of student-led initiatives in induction programmes (Programme: Pre & Post-Registration Learning Disability

The Learning Disability Programme’s Annual Student Conference (Programme: Pre & Post-Registration Learning Disability)

Faculty of Science & Technology

Mid-semester module reviews (Programme(s): Unspecified)

Field trips (Programme(s): Unspecified)

The use of guest lectures from industry (Programme(s): Unspecified)

The use of “real life” examples and problem solving in assessment, particularly in Built Environment programmes) (Programme(s): Construction, Surveying and Architecture & Planning)

Commendable and/or Significant Achievements

The Law School’s excellent outcome of the Law Society’s inspection of the Legal Practice Course in November 2006 (Programme: Law (Professional Courses))

The significant contribution made by the Department of Music and Performing Arts to music in the community (Programme: Music)

The MBA student team took part in, and won the 1-10 Innovators Business Start-up plan competition (Programme: Postgraduate)

The award of national prizes from professional bodies to students studying on our undergraduate programme (Programme: Undergraduate)

Faculty of Health & Social Care (reporting on the former Institute of Health & Social Care and former Homerton School of Health Studies)

Within the Faculty the work of convergence has followed very quickly on the 15/30 curriculum development. Externals have commended staff for their hard work in maintaining standards and enthusiasm in the face of significant change (generic to Faculty)

Five staff from the social work team published books in 2006/07 - this list of publications can be seen in the social work/social policy documents (Programme: Social Work & Social Care)

Being in the unique position as the only HEI in the country to deliver Radiography education, solely by FDL (Programme: Allied Health & Counselling)

The selection of the Learning Disability Programme’s Annual Student Conference for presentation as an example of best practice in the QAA’s ‘Skills for Health’ Conference (Programme(s): Pre & Post-Registration Learning Disability)

Faculty of Science & Technology

The Award of national prizes to Forensic Science and Chemistry students (Programme(s): Unspecified)

Appendix 2 Summary of Recommendations to the Senate

1. Based on generally positive feedback in its first year of operation, the use of the aide-mémoire should be continued (paragraph 2.2).

2. The relevant Associate Deans of Faculty (with responsibility for quality assurance) should confirm to the Head of Quality Assurance that all essential requirements have been satisfied by Monday 5th May 2008 (paragraph 3.2).

3. The relevant Associate Deans of Faculty (with responsibility for quality assurance) should confirm to the Head of Quality Assurance that all amended action plans have been received and approved by Monday 5th May 2008 (paragraph 3.3).

4. Programme Leaders should be asked to comment on the implementation and usefulness of Anglia Ruskin’s Generic Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards in the AMR for delivery of pathways in 2007/08, a summary of which will be reported in next year’s Summary Report to the Senate (paragraph 3.7).

5. The issue of the quality of referencing by students in written work should not continue to require further explicit comment in future AMRs (as a recurring theme) unless raised by other sources as part of the standard annual monitoring process (paragraph 3.8).

6. The issue of ineffective communication with external examiners should not continue to require further explicit comment in future AMRs (as a recurring theme) unless raised by other sources as part of the standard annual monitoring process (paragraph 3.9 (a)).

7. The issue of needing to continue to improve communication between Anglia Ruskin departments and collaborative partners should not continue to require further explicit comment in future AMRs (as a recurring theme) unless raised by other sources as part of the standard annual monitoring process (paragraph 3.9 (c))

8. The three identified issues of institutional significance should be reported to the relevant responsible managers and/or committees who are then required to provide a written response to the next meeting of the Senate (June 2008), detailing any action planned, or taken, to address these issues (paragraph 4.2).

9. The Senate should endorse the examples of good and innovative practice and commendable and/or significant achievements listed in Appendix 1 which should then be disseminated to the wider Anglia Ruskin community (paragraph 5.2).

10. INSPIRE should select a minimum of two of the examples of good and innovative practice identified in Appendix 1 and organise sessions to promote and disseminate the good practice as part of the 2008 Learning & Teaching Conference (paragraph 5.4).

11. The Head of Quality Assurance should arrange for the main statistical reports to be downloaded and stored on a public electronic area (to be determined) and that the statistical reports are no longer appended to the AMR (paragraph 6.3).

12. The Human Resources Department and C&ITS should be asked to consider the possibility of offering regular (perhaps six monthly) training sessions for Pathway and Programme Leaders which explore the wide range of statistical reports that are available and explain how they can be used and interpreted (paragraph 6.5).

13. The annual monitoring of NSAD pathways delivered in 2007/08 should be conducted under the auspices of NSAD only (ie: Anglia Ruskin will not include NSAD pathways in the annual monitoring process for 2007/08) (paragraph 6.8).

Summary Report to the Senate 16 Annual Monitoring of Delivery in 2006/07 Appendix 3

2008 Faculty Overview report of Annual Monitoring of delivery in 2006-7

Areas to be covered by the report, as listed in the guidance notes.

1. Essential Requirements

2. Statistical Data

3. External Examiner Reports

4. Key Issues, Themes & Trends

5. Previous Year’s Action Plans and Readers’ Reports

6. Future Action Plans (a complete set of action plans should be attached to the overview report)

7. Examples of Good and Innovative Practice

8. Issues for Special Consideration during 2007/08

9. The implementation of the 15/30 Credit Curriculum

10. Outstanding Actions

11. Comment on the effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring process and the operation of the process itself. This may also include any recommendations for the future enhancement of the process.

Summary Report to the Senate 17 Appendix 3: ALSS Overview Report Appendix 3

1. Essential Requirements Annual Monitoring Reports (AMRs) meeting the essential requirements were received from all the Programmes in the Faculty and considered by the Faculty Board’s Annual Monitoring Subcommittee held on 30 January 2008. The AMRs considered were:

Law (Professional Courses) and Law (Academic Courses) Cambridge School of Art (Design & Art and Media Programmes) Communication, Film & Media English and Writing Languages and Intercultural Communication English as a Foreign Language Music Performing Arts Humanities Social Sciences

The meeting also considered the Annual Synoptic Report of courses delivered at Norwich School of Art & Design, which was accompanied by copies of all external examiners reports for taught undergraduate and postgraduate provision and their associated action plans.

2. Statistical data The overall picture is an improving one with most reports using centrally provided data to good effect. Three reports (English & Writing, Communication, Film & Media and Performing Arts) noted some double-counting of students on two-subject pathways. Where AMRs have indicated difficulties with statistical data but have not indicated the precise nature of the difficulties or whether action has been taken to address them, the Sub-Committee agreed to ask authors to provide such information. It should be noted that the Faculty’s two non-modular courses in Law (Professional) and EFL fall outside centrally generated statistics. The sub-committee queried whether Agreed Result Statistics can be presented by Programme as well as by Department.

3. External Examiner reports The sub-committee noted with satisfaction the very positive comments made by the Faculty’s External Examiners. In 2006-7 no standards at risk had been identified and the subcommittee was generally satisfied that points raised in External Examiner reports had received an appropriate response in SMART Action Plans.

The sub-committee was also pleased to receive copies of all NSAD External Examiner reports which it was able to correlate with the School’s synoptic overview report. In addition, the provision of detailed summaries of, and responses to, the External Examiner reports as an annex to the synoptic report was welcomed by the sub-committee as it had not been the case previously. This had provided the sub- committee with the necessary assurance that issues of concern raised by External Examiners were covered by the synoptic report and future enhancement plans.

4. Key Issues, Themes and Trends No common concerns emerged from the eleven AMRs this year.

5. Previous Year’s Action Plans and Readers’ Reports The sub-committee was able to confirm that Action Plans for the academic year 2006- 7 had been implemented and that such responses as were required to Readers’ Reports had been made.

6. Future Action Plans The sub-committee felt that in the main Action Plans for 2007-8 reflected the issues discussed in the AMRs and were informed by statistical analysis where appropriate. On occasion proposed actions were a little vague or repetitive and the sub-committee requested resubmission of the Action Plan in one case. The sub-committee wishes to

repeat the point it made last year: if an Action Plan contains too many action points it is generally not SMART. While the sub-committee is reluctant to recommend an upper bound, it judged excessive the 24 action points contained in one AMR.

7. Examples of good and innovative practice See below

8. Issues for Special Consideration during 2007/08 None were highlighted by the sub-committee.

9. Implementation of the 15-30 Curriculum The sub-committee was pleased to note that from an internal perspective the new curriculum had worked well in its first year of operation and, importantly, that External Examiners were also supportive of the new curriculum.

10. Outstanding Actions See below

11. Comment on the effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring process

The sub-committee felt that this round of Annual Monitoring Reports had been commendably thorough and wished to thank all authors, particularly those new to the process. The sub-committee had noted last year that AMRs have an important and developing role to play in the enhancement agenda, and was encouraged by the modifications made to Section C of the template in the current exercise. The sub- committee recommends that the use of the AMR as an enhancement tool be further developed in 2008-9 in the following ways:

1.1. Current Sec C.2.1 (probably subsuming B.1.2, or vice-versa) should include a full analysis of the Faculty’s report on student module evaluation questionnaires using the prescribed format which correlates student satisfaction ratings with mean module marks for all locations of delivery. This format was agreed by ASQRC at its meeting of 21 January 2008 and is currently being used by the Module Evaluation Team to produce its reports. The reports themselves can be pasted directly into AMRs.

1.2. Current Sec C.2.1 should include Programme-level responses to the NSS and SES.

1.3. Current Sec C.2.2. should include a section on steps taken to disseminate the outcomes of Programme Committee minutes to the student body as a whole, not only their representatives

1.4. Section 3 should elicit explicitly staff engagement with the relevant HEA Subject Centre and with INSPIRE activities, and Programme-level engagement with the Faculty L&T Strategy. The current section on staff development needs to be even more explicit in stating that it is the impact of the latter on learning and teaching that counts in this report.

2. Good practice identified through the Annual Monitoring Process and featuring in AQSO’s synoptic report should feed through to the INSPIRE Annual L&T Conference. This would provide clear evidence of the dissemination of good practice beyond our University’s deliberative committee structure.

3. Last year the sub-Committee recommended that a Pathway report template be reintroduced for regional partners. Instead an aide-mémoire was produced and used. While the sub-committee has reservations about the usefulness of this device it recommends that AQSO surveys Programme Leaders directly about it.

4. The sub-committee notes that partner colleges routinely produce their own AMRs and recommends that AQSO meets their opposite numbers in partner colleges

to ascertain whether some common reporting could be achieved within the various templates. This would facilitate the compilation of the Programme AMR at Anglia Ruskin.

Derrik Ferney Associate Dean (Academic Development) 01 February 2008

7. Examples of Good and Innovative Practice (to be reported to the Faculty Learning & Teaching Committee of 14 May 2008)

Programme Nature of Good Practice Law (Professional This item is not transferable to other disciplines but the sub-committee wishes to congratulate the Law School on the Courses) excellent outcome of the Law Society’s inspection of the Legal Practice Course in November 2006

Law (Academic The use of assessed tutorials (Susan Ware) Courses)) The use of portfolio-based assessment in the context of Law education where they are little used (Maria Tighe)

Communication, Film The integration of theory and practice in learning and teaching methodology (Chris Pawling). The theory-practice link and Media means that every practice module contains an element in which students are expected to draw directly on resources from theory modules. This merits elaboration and might be of interest to other parts of the Faculty and the wider University. English and Writing The widespread use now being made of WebCT by highly research-active staff

Music The pervasive use of WebCT, particularly in the CMT pathway The significant contribution made by the Department of Music and Performing Arts to music in the community

Performing Arts The ‘practical essay’ (8.1). The External highlights as innovative practice the ‘practical essay’ which provides students with the opportunity to demonstrate the appropriate interpretation of theoretical materials in practical contexts. The essay is assessed at the point of delivery and is followed by a viva. Humanities The way in which PDP is integrated into a content module ‘ History Today’.

Social Sciences The use of wiki in ‘Race, Racism and Cultural Identity’. Student handbooks and assignments for ‘Work based learning’ module.

Actions are required in respect of the following Programmes Programme Action Required by 31 March 2008 (unless Monitored by stated otherwise) CSA  Clarify the nature of the concern regarding RM Art & Media dyslexia and whether it is an issue of wider concern (C1.1,7)  Clarify whether the need for a systematic approach to Independent Learning Modules (B1.2, 4) is a continuing problem or a ‘one off’. If the former, then import into SMART Action Plan  Include a response to Martin Pover’s concern about two visits (p. 9) in the SMART Action Plan  Clarify whether outstanding actions 4 (Guided Scheduled Learning) and 24 (Module Monitoring) have been carried forward. If so, include in SMART Action Plan  Correlate actions with those in the other Programme in CSA as appropriate CSA  Amend the SMART Action Plan to remove RM Design overlapping actions, to sharpen the remaining actions and to highlight actions c/f from last year’s SMART Action Plan. The revised Plan will ideally have no more than 15 action points  Correlate actions with those in the other Programme in CSA as appropriate Languages and  Clarify Action 3 of the SMART Action Plan; RM Intercultural sharpen up or delete Communication  Clarify relevance of Action 8 of the SMART Action Plan, or delete  Clarify action (to be) taken under Action 9 of the SMART Action Plan in respect of grade inflation in ALP, particularly in Chinese, Russian and Italian Music  Amend SMART Action Plan to respond RM appropriately to External’s concerns about differing expectation in formal written outputs between Music and CMT pathways Humanities  Order pathway statistics according to the RM order presented at the start of the AMR  Provide a commentary on the following modules whose mean was less than 50%: AG105001, AG115001, AG115004, AG115881, AG115882, AG130001, AG130004, AG130008, AG215011, AG315027 [DoS can advise]

2008 Faculty Overview report of Annual Monitoring of delivery in 2006-7

This report covers the Annual Monitoring Reports submitted for the following AIBS Programmes:

Undergraduate – Graham Webster Postgraduate – Jon Salkeld Professional – John Webb

The Reports and the Readers’ Reports were considered at the Faculty Annual Monitoring Sub-Committee held on 4th February 2008.

Areas covered by the report, as listed in the guidance notes are as follows.

2. Statistical Data

9. The Implementation of the 15/30 credit curriculum

11. Comment on the effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring process and the operation of the process itself.

Summary Report to the Senate 23 Appendix 4: AIBS Overview Report Appendix 4

Annual Monitoring Reports (AMRs) for each of the Programmes listed above have been received and were considered by the Faculty Sub-Committee. Written Readers’ Reports for the Postgraduate and Professional AMRs have also been received. A verbal report was given for the Undergraduate AMR. It was noted, by the Sub-Committee, that these reports needed to be formalised. These reports have now been received. Comments contained in all the Readers’ Reports have contributed to the synoptic report.

2. Statistical data

All reports analysed the data available. Module data for the undergraduate and postgraduate pathways was particularly useful in identifying modules where the mean mark was either above or below the university guidelines. Any modules which have been identified as a cause for concern in terms of their mean mark will be investigated in conjunction with the work which is currently being undertaken on “Killer Modules”, ie those with a high failure rate.

There is still some ambiguity with regard to pathway statistics. For the undergraduate pathways the common first year across the entire Undergraduate Programme enables students to transfer between pathways. It is not clear how these transfers are recorded in the statistics, as they appear to indicate poor retention on the pathways when in fact it is merely a change of direction by students. This issue was picked up in last year’s report but there appears to have been little change in the presentation of the statistics.

For the postgraduate pathways there were no issues of concern regarding the statistics and these were used effectively to inform student achievement and progression. There were no significant areas of concern in relation to either modules or pathways.

For the Professional Programme the Programme Leader is reliant on statistics provided by the professional bodies for the accounting pathways, or by the students. These are inevitably incomplete. This is unlikely to improve in the future due to data protection issues. However from the data available it is apparent that AIBS students continue to perform in line with, and in some cases above, the national average.

3. External Examiner reports

The External Examiners’ reports for 2006/7 were generally very positive and there were no serious areas of concern nor were any standards at risk identified.

Although the report from Kate Moseley (Professional Programme) had not been available for the writing of the Annual Monitoring Report this has now been received and all issues raised in the report have been addressed.

Copies of the relevant External Examiners’ reports were included in each Annual Monitoring Report together with responses from Heads of Department and Directors of Studies, as appropriate.

Action Plans included responses to comments made by External Examiners.

Recurring positive comments related to:

“ Exemplary conduct of DAP and Administrative procedures” (David Lilley, Larry Meacham and Tony Conibear)

Three accounting and information systems modules were identified by the External Examiner (George Foster) as exemplary for their innovative approach, high standards and excellent management: Budgeting Planning and Control Web Design for Business Financial Management

Professor Philip Hardwick indicated that he was pleased we had responded to his previous comments and now provided more extensive feedback to students, marked consistently and used the a wider range of marks. This was also commented on by Professor Larry Meacham.

David Lilley commented that “Aims and intended learning outcomes are particularly well defined”. He praised the “Close liaison with the professional body”. He also welcomed the revised MA Corporate Governance modules which “place a heavy emphasis on practitioner knowledge and understanding”.

There was evidence that quality of feedback to students had improved (David Lilley) but there is still work to be done on this (as indicated further on in this report).

There was good evidence of double marking, and the Postgraduate Programme was congratulated on the “Timely and comprehensive notification of course material and assessment proposals.”

The new modules were considered to be “innovative in terms of teaching and learning.” Colleagues were commended for the “theory-to-practice approach”, the “use of team working techniques and case studies.” (Larry Meacham)

Consistency of marking across the various cohorts remained an issue which has been picked up by several external examiners but has been addressed in the various action plans. Systems to ensure consistency in marking and moderation are being reviewed by the Faculty, particularly in respect of the increasing number of collaborative partners.

The need for formative assessment, the variability of feedback, the need for clear marking schemes and the inclusion of marking criteria in all module guides was raised by one external (Tessa Owens). This has been picked up in the action plans and will also be reviewed by the Working Party on Student Feedback which will review marking schemes, formative assessment as well as the consistency of written feedback.

For the Undergraduate Programme Managing People Finance and Marketing remained an area of concern for the External Examiner (Tessa Owens) as the validated assessment method did not fully address all the learning outcomes. This module has since been revised and the assessment method altered to 3 assignments rather than a combination of examinations and assignments. The Module Leader has ensured that the latest assessment for this module does address all the learning outcomes. The module will continue to be monitored by the Head of Department.

Adrian Haberberg expressed concerns regarding the approach taken to Major Projects, indicating that in some cases there was lack of clarity as to the role of primary research and research methodology. This is being addressed through a review of the supervision of the Major Project by the Faculty.

Two marketing modules also needed to be reviewed in terms of their application of theory and this is being undertaken by the Module Leaders and Head of Department.

4. Key Issues, Themes and Trends

The decline in the number of UK applicants to the International Business pathway continues to be an area of concern. The review of the pathway structure and recruitment onto these pathways during 2007/8 should be monitored in the next AMR for undergraduate pathways.

Our university assessment calendar has been reviewed, and the Faculty has produced its own more detailed assessment calendar. This needs to be developed further to act as a cue for the various processes and procedures associated with the production of learning, teaching and assessment material.

For professional courses, the collection and analysis of statistical information remains problematic as this is reliant on information being disclosed by students.

Stronger links to industry and increased employer engagement have been achieved through the validation of practice based pathways. However the inclusion of a work placement period in all undergraduate pathways needs to be investigated and developed further.

Consistency in feedback and moderation across cohorts remains an issue in external examiner reports, and this will be monitored.

The need for formative assessment, clear marking schemes and the publication of assessment criteria needs to be reviewed and this will be addressed through the Faculty working party on student assessment and feedback, which is operating in conjunction with the INSPIRE project.

APL tariffs relating to postgraduate, professional and undergraduate awards have been developed for all relevant pathways. Work is continuing with professional bodies to obtain further exemptions for our AIBS pathways.

The need to champion the delivery of the curriculum through web-based material continues to be important for all programme areas. However this needs to be supported by a Faculty Learning Technologist, and an appointment to this post should be made as a matter urgency.

Professional students continue to find the accommodation inappropriate for teaching, while the lack of catering facilities has a detrimental effect on the student experience. This needs to be addressed for our university as a whole.

Plagiarism remains an issue of concern for all programme areas, and had been raised on several occasions by the Directors of Studies who dealt with an increasing case-load. It is proposed that one means of addressing this could be through the

Summary Report to the Senate 26 Appendix 4: AIBS Overview Report Appendix 4 electronic submission of work, and the requirement for students to submit a “turn-it- in” report with their work.

The Action Plans for the academic year 2006/7 have been implemented and responses to Readers’ Reports have been made. The Programme Leaders should be congratulated for implementing these plans and for the favourable comments to this effect received from many of the External Examiners.

6. Future Action Plans

Action Plans for 2007-8 reflect the issues raised by External Examiners and those discussed in the AMRs. They were informed by statistical analysis where appropriate, and in most cases had realistic, measurable and achievable targets.

The Undergraduate Programme has 21 Actions/Targets/Goals. This may seem excessive, but it reflects the number of pathways and deliveries which are included in this report (45 in total). The action plan will be reviewed, throughout the academic year, by the Programme Leader and relevant Associate Dean to ensure that the actions identified are being achieved. Longer term deadlines need to specified in the Action Plan.

Further review of the arrangements for writing assessment material, marking and moderation with collaborative partners will require particular attention during the forthcoming academic year, in view of the increase in the number of partnerships. The Faculty is addressing this through a separate review of these processes, and will be making recommendations on the resourcing and management of these partnerships.

Some additions to the action plans have been recorded in the minutes of the Faculty Annual Monitoring Sub-Committee and appropriate action will be taken.

For the Professional Programme, the comment relating to referencing (Adam Palmer) had already been addressed in Semester One, following comment last academic year. This has, therefore, not been included in the current action plan.

A complete set of action plans is attached to this report.

Several areas of good practice have been identified by the External Examiners’ Reports which were included in the Annual Monitoring Reports. These include favourable comments relating to:

 innovative assessment and delivery methods  application of theory to practice  project based delivery and assessment  excellent management and administration of the assessment process  the external examiner’s review days  campus based moderation days

 the close link to professional bodies in respect of the development, delivery, assessment of the curriculum

In addition the following areas have been identified:

7.1. The development of APL tariffs linking the curriculum for professional programmes to the undergraduate and postgraduate curricula to enable students to transfer from professional courses onto specific pathways without having to repeat learning. This has led to the development of international partnerships where top-up programmes will be offered to a large number of students.

7.2. The validation and of three undergraduate pathways which directly relate to practice based learning, which have been developed in conjunction with large corporate organisations (Barclays).

7.3. Validation of, and recruitment to, the first delivery of the “Certificate in Leadership” which provides a distance learning model whereby practitioners can learn in the workplace and study for an undergraduate qualification.

7.4. The inclusion an open lecture series from visiting professors to enhance both the undergraduate and postgraduate curriculum.

7.5. Analysis of examples of previous assessments by new students, during the induction period, has been extended across the postgraduate programme area

7.6. The inclusion of “live case” studies based on research undertaken by staff teaching on the MBA, CIM and DMS.

7.7. The MBA student team took part in, and won the 1-10 Innovators Business Start-up plan competition.

7.8. The inclusion of a “Dragons’ Den” event involving 6 local entrepreneurs, in the MBA pathway.

7.9. The award of national prizes from professional bodies to students studying on our undergraduate programme

Management of collaborative partnerships in view of the increase in the number of partners.

Mechanisms for formative assessment.

Improved feedback to students.

Management and supervision of the Major Project.

Appointment of a Learning Technologist to support the continued development of web-based and on-line learning material.

9. Implementation of 15/30 Curriculum

The external examiners were generally very positive about the revised curriculum structure and indicated that:

“ Both the level and volume of assessment was in line with that required by similar HE institutions” (Philip Hardwick – postgraduate)

“The facility of a wider module curriculum following the introduction of the 15/30 project has enhanced the student learning experience in this regard”. (David Lilley - postgraduate)

“The overall initial evidence is of an improvement in the balance between teaching, learning and assessment.” (David Lilley - postgraduate)

“The new 15 credit modules (and multiples of 15 credit modules) allow scope within modules for more in-depth work.

“I applaud the move towards larger modules form a pedagogical perspective.” (Tessa Owens - undergraduate)

Actions are required in respect of the following Programmes

Programme Action Required by 31 March 2007 (unless Monitored by stated otherwise) Professional Action: John Webb BE Undergraduate BE Graham Webster

11. Comments on the Effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring Process

11.1 The Readers’ Reports, as submitted by AIBS’ Readers, do not help in the consideration of the AMRs by the Faculty Sub-Committee, nor do they assist the production of the summary report. They require much more detail and should give examples. They need to be cross-referenced to specific sections of the AMR.

11.2 The areas of good practice identified in the AMRs and this Report should be widely circulated to staff through departmental meetings and the Learning and Teaching Committee.

11.4 The collection of information through the aide-memoir for specific pathways was extremely helpful in compiling the undergraduate and postgraduate reports. This was particularly the case for collaborative partners as the information provided enabled a much closer monitoring of their delivery to be undertaken.

Brenda Eade Associate Dean (Quality Assurance, Curriculum Development and Student Experience)

February 2008

Faculty of Education

2008 Faculty Overview report of Annual Monitoring of delivery in 2006/2007

Areas covered by the report, as listed in the guidance notes:

2. Statistical Data

4. Key issues, themes and trends

5. Previous Year’s Action Plans and Reader’ Reports

10.Comment on the effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring process and the operation of the process itself. This may also include any recommendations for the future enhancement of the process.

Appendix 1 Action Grid

Summary Report to the Senate 31 Appendix 5: FoE Overview Report Appendix 5

Annual Monitoring Reports (AMRs) for the following programmes were considered by the Faculty Board’s Annual Monitoring Subcommittee held on 24th January 2008:

 BA (Hons) Learning Technology Research (Ultraversity)  Combined Honours and Early Years including FdA Early Years Childcare  Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and Post Compulsory Education (PCE)  Teaching Assistants  PGCE (Post and Professional) Primary and Secondary Initial Teacher Training (PGCE ITT)  BA (Hons) Primary Undergraduate Initial Teacher Training (UG ITT)

2. Statistical Data

Most reports made use of centrally produced data, however there were issues with the accuracy of the data produced (wrong codes attributed) and the accessibility of the statistics for partner colleges. The AMR subcommittee agreed that when such cases arise, it should be the responsibility of the programme leader to draw attention to anomalies to the appropriate support unit. The subcommittee also proposed that centrally produced statistics should become a regular agenda item for FMG and Discipline Network Group meetings. It was also noted that trends in certain pathways were not easily identifiable using the centrally produced data, however Programme Leaders have been able to identify patterns in some programmes and pathways using locally produced data.

The group noted that the use of External Examiner reports has become more efficient and strategic. The practice of scanning reports, sending them to Programme Leaders and putting them on the J drive (introduced by the FQAO) was commended. Although there were no outstanding actions arising from the External Examiner reports, it was agreed that the reports had become more ‘user friendly’ and focussed. However the generic nature of the report questions occasionally made it difficult to ‘drill down’ to identify which pathway was being reported on.

4. Key issues, themes and trends

The format and remit of the AMR makes it quite difficult to identify year on year trends, however two of the three departments noted that staff

sickness may be linked to retention and the NSS survey results. A Faculty position on ‘cover’ for staff absence has been proposed.

5. Previous Year’s Action Plans and Reader’ Reports

The previous year’s action plans have been completed in all cases except where PSB changes prevented them from being undertaken, as in PCE. The accessibility of digital resources at all sites for the Teaching Assistants (Foundation degree), was seen to be an outstanding issue, as was staffing.

The recommendation to revise three of the action plans (PGCE ITT, Primary UG (ITT) and PCE was noted. In two cases the reason for this was the need to encapsulate all of the issues identified in the report in the action plans.

Good practice was identified in two of the three departments of the Faculty. Specifically;

 Academic skills expectations paper. (Department of Educational Studies)  Customised induction programme for PRC students organised by the library. (Department of Initial Professional Studies)  Identification and use of external expertise to enhance teacher training experience.(Department of Initial Professional Studies)

The introduction of the new regulations accompanying the 15/30 curriculum was perceived by one programme leader to have caused difficulties with assessment. Programme leaders are reviewing pathways to ensure that the curriculum offer sits comfortably within the academic regulations.

Programme Action required By Monitored by

PGCE ITT Revise action 20th March 2008 LAC plan to include SMART targets

Primary UG Revise action 20th March 2008 LAC (ITT) plan to capture all identified issues PCE Revise action 20th March 2008 SF plan to capture all identified issues General Training for PLs 30th April 2008 AD, DOS Position 30th July 2008 Dean statement re staff absence ( staff handbook)

Key: AD Associate Dean, DOS Director of Studies, LAC Linda Amrane- Cooper, SF Scilla Furey

10.Comment on the effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring process and the operation of the process itself. This may also include any recommendations for the future enhancement of the process.

The group agreed that the quality of the AMRs had improved and the process itself had become more efficient. The proposal for the Associate Dean and the Director of Studies to work more closely with the Programme Leaders in the run up to the AMR writing process was welcomed. The need for a more explicitly articulated relationship between Annual Monitoring and Faculty Management Group was expressed. It was suggested that the AMR process should start earlier in the academic year. .

Faculty of Health & Social Care

2008 Faculty Overview Report of Annual Monitoring of Delivery in 2006-7

Areas covered by the report, as listed in the guidance notes:

2. Statistical Data

5. Previous Year’ Action Plans and Readers’ Reports

10. Comment on the effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring process and the operation of the process itself. This may also include any recommendation for the future enhancement of the process

Summary Report to the Senate 35 Appendix 6: FHSC Overview Report Appendix 6

ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY

Annual Monitoring of Delivery of Pathways in 2006/07

Faculty of Health and Social Care Overview Report

Annual monitoring reports (AMRs) meeting the essential requirements, including requisite attachments were received from the following programmes:-

Acute Care, Pre-registration (Overall) Acute Care, Pre-registration (Adult Branch) Acute Care, Post-registration Long Term Conditions and Older People, Post-registration Long Term Conditions and Older People, Pre-registration Allied Health and Counselling (Complementary Medicine and Podiatry) Allied Health and Counselling (ODP) Allied Health and Counselling (Radiography) Child, Youth and Family Studies Pre and Post Registration Mental Health Pre and Post Registration Learning Disability Advanced Practice and Research Primary Care, Public Health and Social Policy (Cambridge) Primary Care, Public Health and Social Policy (Essex) Social Work, Social Care and Counselling combined report (Essex and Cambridge) Placement Development and Support

In addition to the above, a synoptic report was received relating to the 06/07 HSHS provision. This utilised the guidelines in appendix K of the AMR procedural document appropriately, highlighting strengths, areas requiring attention and providing a SMART action plan.

There was an omission in reporting on pathways delivered by Regional Partners in the Social Work, Social Care and Counselling report. The sub-committee asked the pathway leaders to confirm the status of the pathways delivered at PRC: FdSc Counselling and CoWA: HNC Health and Social Studies. They have confirmed that the pathways are currently running out and there were no intakes during 06/07. However as there are continuing students into 07/08 it should be included in the review and the pathway leaders have been asked to provide this. All of the other AMRs received for consideration by the sub-committee on Wednesday 30th January 08 met the essential requirements as listed in the QAD guidance notes.

2. Statistical Data

Centrally provided statistics were used in all AMRs as a main source of data. There were few problems identified in relation to accessing data though several reports commented that this information was not comprehensive for the purposes of AMR and several used additional data. For example, Acute Care-Pre-reg (overall) utilised local data to allow for reflecting between the differences across and between intakes and Social Work and Podiatry included the use of local data to fully reflect the cohort. The low numbers within some groups, e.g. Acute Care- Post-reg and particularly Learning Disability Nursing, made it difficult to draw significant conclusions from the statistics. Some of the centrally provided statistics included students from other pathways who were not part of the programme under review, e.g. Advanced Practice and Research.

The data enabled the large number of programmes managed within the Faculty to be aware of significant trends. For example it identified those with good recruitment and/or continuation and completion rates, such as Adult Nursing; Child, Youth and Family Studies and Long Term Conditions. Those programmes with problems in relation to recruitment, attrition and assessment success, included action plans to address these issues. However an important use of the statistics in annual review would be a more detailed analysis of current issues, e.g. retention and attrition rates, but the underlying factors are not evidenced in the information as it is currently provided or presented in the AMRs. A standardised presentation of statistics should enable comparison between programmes, which will be particularly beneficial where pathways within programme review are part of an overall provision, e.g. pre-registration nursing. Further staff development would be useful to enhance the depth of statistical analysis where there is a requirement to understand factors related to trends in order to take appropriate action.

Another gap noted in the statistics is the analysis of pathway performance as a whole; the current requirement to consider modules with a mean of less than 50% has not always led to a review of performance throughout the whole pathway.

A spreadsheet detailing the responses from 59 external examiners from IHSC programmes was available to the subcommittee and the external examining reports from HSHS were included with the synoptic report. 4 of these identified issues considered to place academic standards at risk. 2 of the 4 referred to over-generous marking and staff development has already taken place to support the lecturers concerned. The third issue related to APL procedures and the fourth comment linked with annonymising scripts. These have also been responded to appropriately. 2 AMR authors have been asked to review their

Summary Report to the Senate 37 Appendix 6: FHSC Overview Report Appendix 6 action plans to include reference to an item raised by the externals annual review. Given the large number of reports, the very positive comments about innovative assessment and the sound standards evidenced in the programmes are very encouraging.

Most external examiners commented positively on communication with the Faculty, though several commented on the use of temporary administrative staff and the impact this had on communication. The newly developed administrative structures have been implemented within the Faculty, and comments from external examiners re communication will be relooked at in the next round of programme sub-committee meetings.

Work from previous year’s action plans re referencing continues and appears to be an ongoing action. Consistency in the advice staff give to students needs consistent attention in such a large Faculty with many new members, as standard practice has been slightly different in the North and South of the patch. It was noted at the meeting that the library website is more user-friendly and a good source to promote a consistent approach across our Faculty.

Several reports identified actions they propose to tackle plagiarism, though it would be appropriate for a Faculty, if not University strategy, such as ‘turn it in’ to be adopted to tackle this. Several externals discussed the need to review the monitoring of practice assessment, as they had been invited to meet with students but had not been able to make the time for this. The strategies to ensure moderation and reliability of practice assessment should be reviewed in the coming year.

4. Key Issues and Trends

Recruitment, attrition and a significant number of modules with a low mean pass rate or high failure rate have been noted within the AMRs. There are strategic as well as programme focused action plans currently in place to reverse all 3 of these trends.

Sourcing sufficient, appropriate and audited practice placements with adequately prepared mentors and assessors continues to be a challenge which is being addressed by the appointment of a Director for Practice Learning and a review of auditing processes in the Faculty.

Feedback from employers suggests that there are improvements in students’ ‘fitness for practice’ and their level of knowledge and skills for the workplace.

There is positive feedback from partners and stakeholders relating to the support the Faculty provides for practice placements and mentor preparation. They appreciate active involvement in programme development and monitoring via a

Summary Report to the Senate 38 Appendix 6: FHSC Overview Report Appendix 6 range of fora, e.g. Joint Education Forum, though how these feed into the AMR process should be considered.

There is a general feeling that the way programme reviews achieve the active involvement of students and stakeholders, should be reconsidered as they indicate that travelling to our university for meetings is problematic because of the distances involved.

Special attention should be given to the support of students remaining on non- converging pathways as more than one version of curricula can lead to confusion around managing processes.

The application of standardised marking criteria in assessment is welcomed and there has been greater use of formative assessment within some programmes which has evaluated positively.

External examiners have commented positively on the range of teaching, learning and assessment strategies but problems have been identified related to access and use of Web CT.

There is evidence across the programme reports of very positive student evaluation in some pathways, but also low returns related to module evaluation. There have been some difficulties in amalgamating the evaluation of mentor/placement, student and academic staff that ensures everyone has timely feedback on all aspects of delivery.

That the Faculty has some good examples within Radiography and Social Work of flexible delivery, but needs to develop an infrastructure to support much greater use of FDL as a larger proportion of its future learning and teaching strategies.

5. Previous Years Action Plans

4 readers reports required no response. The remaining reports were responded too though there is some variation in how comprehensive this has been. The previous years action plans have been successfully completed or if not finalised, incorporated into the action plans for this year.

Readers commented that on the whole action plans had been appropriately constructed and dealt with the issues raised within the reports. It was noted that the action plans need to strike a balance between addressing SMART requirements and providing the correct focus on issues, e.g. some action plans linked issues and action very specifically and in a measurable way. Others were

Summary Report to the Senate 39 Appendix 6: FHSC Overview Report Appendix 6 less specific or addressed a wider remit and so would not be able to be implemented or evaluated at programme level.

The sub-committee discussed the requirements of an appropriate action plan. It was evident that certain concerns generally known within the faculty, e.g. recruitment and retention were not appearing in action plans. There was some debate about the nature of action plans and how strategic there remit should be. However it was also recognised that they were developed around measurable outcomes that needed to be addressed annually.

Good and innovative practice

User and carer involvement that is well established in some programmes being expanded across the faculty.

Within the Faculty the work of convergence has followed very quickly on the 15/30 curriculum development. Externals have commended staff for their hard work in maintaining standards and enthusiasm in the face of significant change.

Students being required to write a book chapter as an assessment task.

Innovative development around the use of the extensive skills facilities and other strategies related to practice learning and assessment including expansion of the placement and interprofessional learning opportunities within the curriculum. 86% of FHSC students have said they would recommend their placements to another student.

Significant and/or commendable achievements

The innovative nature of some aspects of assessment within the Faculty, e.g. patchwork texts have been commended by external examiners and presented to several Universities across the country.

The impact of student-led initiatives is particularly strong in some programmes, e.g. students within learning disability nursing reframed induction material sent to placements to ensure its relevance to their issues and their annual student conference was chosen as a presentation by QAA for their ‘Skills for Health’ conference

5 staff from the social work team published books in 2006/07-this list of publications can be seen in the social work/social policy documents.

Being in the unique position as the only HEI in the country to deliver Radiography education, solely by FDL.

8. Issues for Special consideration

Programme leaders should review the involvement of external examiners in practice assessment and students and stakeholders in programme committees- at present this variable across the programmes. Alternative strategies for engagement may need to be considered given the geography of the Faculty and may need to be reported differently.

9. Issues in relation to the implementation of 15/30 curricula

The effect of the withdrawing of a third attempt in assessment is having some impact within some programmes. Programme teams are not suggesting any reversal of this decision, just noting the outcome for weaker students.

10.Outstanding Actions

There were no reports with outstanding actions following the reader’s report. 4 action plans were identified that could be enhanced by including an additional issues raised in the AMR/readers report.

11.Comment on the effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring process

Staff engagement in the process has been good and the subcommittee members who were in the Faculty last year have commented on the improvement in the quality of the AMRs. It is particularly commendable that this engagement has occurred at a time of changing roles and programme reorganisation within the Faculty. For the next review round student involvement and how this is reflected in the review process more effectively should be considered. Faculty also need to consider the use of appendices within the AMR and some rationalisation of these. There was some inclusion of interesting but not requisite material which made some reports bulky. It would be useful to consider the feasibility of amalgamating the processes for annual monitoring for our university and the professional statutory bodies as it is evident similar data and analysis is required by both. The use of a standardised template within the Faculty would enable comparative analysis across programmes and facilitate the use of review for more than one purpose.

It has been identified in this report that there could be further improvement in the statistical data available to programme leaders in compiling the report, particularly to allow comparisons across and between intakes of cognate programmes. The sub-committee would recommend staff development to enhance the use of statistical analysis within the AMRs. Anomalies re the data we have access to this year is being fed back to the periodic review working group.

The reader’s reports provided insightful commentary for the subcommittee meeting and the collation of this by Caroline Watts into an action focused grid was perceived by all members as particularly helpful. It was suggested that a bullet-point type list around the key themes in the reader’s reports would also assist the committee.

All members of the subcommittee reported that the AMR activity was useful in providing management information necessary for targeted quality enhancement, and for identifying and so raising awareness about exemplars of good practice.

Anne Devlin Associate Dean (Teaching, Learning and Quality) March 08

The Senate Committee Summary Report

Faculty of Science and Technology

Faculty Board Annual Monitoring Overview Report for 2006 2007

Committee Title: Faculty Board Annual Monitoring Subcommittee (Faculty of Science and Technology)

Parent Committee: Faculty Board/Senate

Date of Meeting 21st January 2008

CONTENTS: (from guidance notes)

Essential requirements

Statistical data

External examiners’ reports

Key issues, themes and trends

Previous year’s action plans and reader’s reports

Future action plans

Examples of good and innovative practice

Issues for consideration during 2007/8

Outstanding actions

Comment on the effectiveness of the annual monitoring process and the operation of the process itself. This may also include any recommendations for the future enhancement of the process.

Summary Report to the Senate 43 Appendix 7: S&T Overview Report Appendix 7

1. Essential Requirements Key documents informing this report are the Reader’s Reports for the 2006 2007 annual monitoring round, together with a summary of areas identified by external examiners where Anglia Ruskin University’s academic standards may be at risk. Annual Monitoring Reports (AMRs) which met the essential requirements were received from all the Programmes in the Faculty: (in alphabetical order by Programme title)

Animal & Environmental Biology Architecture and Planning Biomedical, Molecular and Sports Science Computing (Chelmsford) Computer Science (Cambridge) Construction Design & Engineering Forensic Science & Chemistry Ophthalmic Dispensing Optometry & Optical Management Psychology Surveying Technology

In contrast to last year, all Regional Partners provided appropriate and helpful information (albeit not always by stated deadlines) ..

2. Statistical data

All reports included and used as their main point of reference centrally produced statistical data. Several AMRs and Readers’ Reports noted an improvement on previous years in the quality and clarity of the centrally-produced data. There is still, however, a lack of awareness of how to rectify discrepancies between centrally produced and locally held data, with some confusion over responsibility for making corrections to these data.

The AMR template does not specifically encourage comparison of data on a year-on- year basis. This is something which would be helpful in relation to strategic planning, and we would welcome a minor change to the template to promote discussion of e.g. year-on-year trends in recruitment to specific pathways.

The Faculty would also like to request that central statistical reports should indicate clearly the period to which the data refer (with a start date and end date, rather than just reference to the academic year), to facilitate like-with-like comparison with locally held data.

There has been some slight improvement in 2006 2007 in the number of students completing their award within the specified timeframe; this may be due to the introduction of the new 15/30 curriculum and a reduction in the number of reassessment attempts permitted by each student, but it is too early to draw firm conclusions. It is still not easy to track students who have transferred internally onto another pathway, and this can contribute to apparently poor retention/withdrawal rates when in fact the student has remained with the Faculty or at least within Anglia Ruskin University.

3. External examiners’ reports

For two programmes, external examiners identified areas where they considered Anglia Ruskin University’s standards to be at risk. In Forensic Science and Chemistry, both external examiners raised issues in relation to staffing and the running-out of discontinued programmes. Both these issues have since been addressed by the Faculty of Science and Technology, with the appointment of new staff and other measures to improve the student experience. The second programme where issues were raised was Life Sciences, and in particular the Biomedical, Molecular and Sports Science programme, where concerns were raised about the equivalence of achievement and experience of students studying the same modules at different locations within the region. This issue is also currently being addressed by the Faculty (via, for example, an internal review of various aspects of collaboration with SEEVIC).

One external examiner (for modules within the Biomedical, Molecular and Sports Science programme) failed to complete an annual report for 2006 2007 and did not responded to subsequent correspondence from the Faculty nor from AQSO. The contract for this external has now been revoked and a replacement appointment has recently (February 2008) been confirmed.

In a small number of cases, issues raised by external examiners have not been followed up in the SMART action plan for the programme. None of these represents a major cause for concern, but nevertheless these omissions have been noted and action required

Apart from these specific concerns, external examiners were generally very positive about curriculum delivery within S&T, and found much to praise in the various programmes. The external examiners’ reports for 2006 2007 highlight a wide range of examples of achievement and good practice.

4. Key issues, themes and trends i. Staffing Staffing remains an issue in some areas, particularly for the pathways within the Department of the Built Environment, where there is still heavy reliance on part-time staff and where it has proved difficult to recruit to key posts. ii. Recruitment and retention There remains wide variability in recruitment and retention across the different pathways on offer in S&T. Computer Science/Computing/Design and Technology (now together in the new Department of Digital Sciences and Technology) in particular have failed to recruit viable cohorts for some modules and pathways at some delivery locations.

Across Anglia Ruskin, the current working group on retention is addressing issues relating to why students leave; their final report and recommendations are due later this year. Within the Faculty, we will continue to share best practice in relation to retention and also to review the viability of poorly recruiting pathways.

Summary Report to the Senate 45 Appendix 7: S&T Overview Report Appendix 7 iii. Laboratory provision and technical support Within Surveying, laboratory provision is still reported as inadequate by students and staff alike, and there are also deficiencies in technical support (reflected by student dissatisfaction). The opening of the new Faculty Building in Chelmsford should go some way to easing these concerns. vi. Staff development There is clearly a need for staff development in relation to writing SMART action plans (not all action plans included all actions arising from AMRs, and not all action plans were SMART). Central (AQSO) provision of workshops and general staff training in this area would be welcome. vii. Plagiarism There is also a need for further staff development on plagiarism (this was highlighted in some external examiners’ reports as well as by academic staff in AMRs), and for clear instructions on the detection and handling of plagiarism and other academic offences. The Faculty plans to address this need by holding lunchtime briefing sessions/short workshops later this semester. iv. Provision at SEEVIC Within the Biomedical, Molecular and Sports Science pathway, concerns have been raised both by students and by academic staff at core Anglia Ruskin about the quality of provision at SEEVIC. One external examiner has also questioned the comparability of the student experience at RP colleges with that at core Anglia Ruskin. The Faculty is addressing these concerns by holding an internal review of provision at SEEVIC, prior to the institutional review due later this semester.

5. Previous year’s action plans and reader’s reports

In nearly all areas, previous action plans and Readers’ Reports have been responded to appropriately.

In Optometry, the previous Reader’s Report asked for an expanded action plan for 2006 2007. This request has apparently not yet been addressed; the Faculty will follow this up with the AMR author and HoD.

Last year’s Faculty overview report raised the issue of university-wide support for students with specific learning needs in written English; this area still needs further attention, particularly with the current emphasis on increasing the recruitment of international students.

6. Future action plans

Not all issues raised in AMRs or in external examiners’ reports for 2006 2007 were carried forward into the SMART action plans, and not all actions listed were fully “SMART”. These issues have been flagged with AMR authors, and programme action plans will be amended as appropriate.

7. Examples of good and innovative practice

Across the Reader’s Reports and external examiners’ reports, a number of areas of good practice and achievement were highlighted, both by internal reviewers and by external examiners.

These include:

 mid-semester module reviews  field trips  “hands on” experience  guest lectures from industry  use of “real life” examples and problem solving in assessment (particularly in Built Environment programmes)  innovative approaches to learning and teaching  award of national prizes to Forensic Science and Chemistry students

Where appropriate, examples of good practice in learning and teaching will be disseminated more widely within the Faculty.

8. Issues for consideration during 2007/8 i. Collaborative partnerships (regional and international) Administrative arrangements for the management of collaborative partnerships will be reviewed and strengthened as the number of these partnerships expands. ii. Penalties for late submission of coursework In two programmes, external examiners raised concerns about the “draconian” penalties for late submission of coursework. This issue has been flagged for discussion at the working group responsible for reviewing the Academic Regulations.

9. Outstanding actions

Outstanding actions arising from the 2006 2007 AMRs have been identified above and are being addressed.

10. Comment on the effectiveness of the annual monitoring process and the operation of the process itself.

This may also include any recommendations for the future enhancement of the process.

In general, the annual monitoring process for S&T for 2006 2007 has gone well, with fewer grumbles about supporting statistical data than in the past, and a better response from regional partners in relation to pathway reports.

There are two areas where the Faculty would like to suggest enhancement of the current annual monitoring process:

Summary Report to the Senate 47 Appendix 7: S&T Overview Report Appendix 7 i. Production of summary grid of issues: The Faculty would welcome the production of a summary grid highlighting issues from Reader’s Reports, across all programmes (as per the grid prepared by Caroline Watts for the FHSC Annual Monitoring Subcommittee meeting; this helped the FHSC subcommittee to identify key issues/recurring themes across programmes, and facilitated discussion on quality enhancement) ii. Strategic analysis and reflection on year-on-year trends The current AMR template does not encourage reporting and reflection on year-on-year trends in e.g. recruitment, retention, progression. It would be valuable to Faculties to have a brief summary of this strategic information included within the AMR; it may be possible to achieve this via a minor change to the current template.

Chair: Sheila Pankhurst (Acting Associate Dean) Date Approved by Chair: 22nd February 2008

Secretary: Ellen Langford (Faculty QAO)

2006/7 Annual Institutional Review Report of Edexcel Licensed Centre BTEC programmes

This annual Institutional Review Report (IRR) should relate to all BTEC programmes run as institutional awards under the Licence Agreement (in most cases this will mean Higher National programmes). Please submit your IRR to the Edexcel University Chief Examiner to arrive before the end of March 2008

Note that any of the following tables may be scrolled if necessary.

ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROGRAMME DETAILS

Centre: Centre number: Anglia Ruskin University 16311

Review sent by: Paul Baxter/Sharon Simpson Date of submitting IRR: 31 March 2008

Position in institution: Head of Quality Assurance/Institutional Quality Assurance Officer E mail address: [email protected]; [email protected]

Name of Committee/Board approving submission of the IRR: Professor Lesley Dobrée, Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic), Chair of the Academic Standards, Quality & Regulations Committee, on behalf of the Senate (the full report will be received by the Senate at its next meeting on 23rd April 2008

FOR EACH BTEC PROGRAMME RUN AT YOUR CENTRE, PLEASE GIVE:

Title of programme: Number Comments: Notes: of Please add comments as necessary. In particular, 1. Indicate with a * programmes that are also run at partner students if no awards are made for any programmes. institutions. receiving 2. For integrated HNC/D programmes please indicate HNC and HND award in awards separately ( eg. 12/21 for 12 HNC and 21 HND awards). IRR period HND Computer Aided Product Design 1 HND Multimedia Computing 2 HNC Electronics 5 HND Electronics 4 HNC Computing 4 HND Computing 2 HNC Engineering* 16 HND Engineering* 45 HNC Business Management* 10 HND Business Management 12 HND Internet Management and Web Design 3 HNC Business Information Technology* 4 HND Business Information Technology 7 HNC Applied Biology 4 HNC Chemistry 3 HNC Architectural Design Technology 1 HNC Construction* 12 HND Construction Management 14 HND Property Surveying 37 HND Sport, Health & Exercise* 5

FOR EACH BTEC PROGRAMME DELIVERED BY A COLLABORATIVE PARTNER CENTRE, PLEASE GIVE: Partner institution Number Comments: Title(s) of programme(s) run at institution of students receiving award in IRR period Braintree College HNC Information Technology 3

Cambridge Regional College HND Motor Vehicle Engineering (Motor Sport) 3 HNC Business Management 6 HNC Construction 6

Summary Report to the Senate 49 Appendix 8: Edexcel Annual Report Appendix 8

College of West Anglia (COWA) HNC Health & Social Care 13 HNC Design (Graphic Design) 7 HND Animal Science & Welfare 4 HND Information Technology 1

Easton College+ HND Animal Science & Welfare 7 HNC Countryside Management 1 HND Countryside Management 8 HND Equine Science & Welfare 3 HND Horticulture 5 HND Sport, Health & Exercise 8

Great Yarmouth College+ HNC Childhood & Youth Studies 14

Huntingdonshire Regional College (HRC) HNC Photography 1 HND Photography 8

Lowestoft College+ HND Engineering 9 HND Childhood & Youth Studies 2 HNC Business Management 3

Thurrock & Basildon College HNC Textiles with Fashion 5

West Suffolk College HNC Engineering 9 HND Engineering 7 HNC Electronic Engineering 10 HNC Building Services Engineering 5 HNC Construction 15 HND Construction 6 + Students from colleges no longer in the partnership who completed awards in September and October 2006 and are therefore included in awards conferred in the academic year 2006/07. ANNUAL REVIEW OF BTEC PROGRAMMES

1 ACADEMIC STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENT Do the External Examiners for each programme covered by the Licence Agreement confirm that the standards set are appropriate for the level of the qualifications?

If this is not the case for any programme give details here and refer to Section 5 if appropriate.

2 ACADEMIC STANDARDS AND STUDENT PERFORMANCE Do the External Examiners for each programme covered by the Licence Agreement confirm that the standard of student performance is at a level appropriate for the programme they have studied?

If this is not the case for any programme give details here and refer to Section 5 if appropriate.

3 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCESS FOR BTEC PROGRAMMES Describe briefly how the institutional quality assurance processes used for producing this report provide an effective focus on the programmes covered by this review and ensure consistency of practice across all programmes. (Include the procedures in place for franchise programmes, where relevant). If this focus is apparent from your published quality assurance review and monitoring procedures, simply attach these procedures to the Review (or provide an electronic link to them).

Please see the attached extract (pages 29, 30, 31 & 32) from the Anglia Ruskin University Senate Code of Practice on the Approval, Annual Monitoring and Periodic Review of Taught Pathways, Procedural Document for 2007/08.

4 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES AND ENHANCEMENTS Give any significant changes in provision, such as newly validated Higher National programmes, changes in franchise position, cessation of programmes, etc. Also, any enhancements to individual programmes you wish to report.

(i) The period of this IRR covers the first delivery of our University’s revised provision based on the structure of multiples of 15 credits.

(ii) Two HND Health & Social Studies, COWA and HND Graphic Design, COWA (Isle campus) continued with a structure of multiples of 10 credits, until current students completed their award. There are no significant issues to report.

(iii) HND Computing Feedback from students and at open days indicated that students taking (or intending to take) this pathway wanted its structure to become flexible so they could progress on to other pathways and specialisms besides BSc (Hons) Computer Science. As a direct result of feedback, a change in the structure of the pathway was proposed and approved such that students could take modules with one of three flavours, pure computer science (the original structure), multimedia and gaming (to permit progression to BSc (Hons) Computer Gaming and Animation Technology) and technical computing (for those wishing to complete the Cisco CCNA modules). Further feedback indicates students welcomed this change and the potential to progress to more degree routes upon completion of their HND.

(iv) During 2006/07, the revised Licence Agreement, which became operational from 2007/08, was signed. The major consequence of the revised Agreement for our University was the re-alignment of the credit ratings of Anglia Ruskin’s Higher National awards (Edexcel current credit ratings are HNC 150, HND 240 whereas Anglia Ruskin credit ratings are 120 and 180 respectively). Edexcel had confirmed that full implementation of the Licence Agreement could be delayed until the commencement of the academic year 2008/09 in order to allow sufficient time for our HN awards to be amended. During the period when our university was finalising arrangements for the necessary revisions, Edexcel proposed revision of their current NQF HNC, from 150 credits to 120 credits, to be available from 2008/09. Anglia Ruskin therefore sought approval, which was confirmed by Edexcel, that the credit rating of the licensed HNC could be retained pending Edexcel’s changes to their overall model. Arrangements are currently in hand for Anglia Ruskin’s HNDs to be revised in time for implementation from 2008/9. Any significant issues will be reported on in subsequent IRRs.

5 MAJOR ISSUES Summarise the situation over any major issues with regard to the BTEC programmes, including issues that have arisen from External Examiners’ reports and with respect to student experience (including teaching and learning resources and issues from programme committees):  unresolved issues raised in previous session(s): action taken

HNC/D Information Technology Two issues were identified, one of which was resolved and reported on in the previous IRR. The remaining issue was the difficulty in getting student representatives at meetings at HRC & COWA. This was addressed through the S.M.A.R.T. Action Plan target to hold more meetings so that more representatives could be involved in the process and was actioned and monitored by the college course leader.

HND Computing In response to low completion rates, student recruitment, retention and attendance was addressed through targets in the S.M.A.R.T. Action Plan. This was actioned by the Programme Leader and monitored by the Head of Department and Programme Leader. Retention has improved in 2006/07, but recruitment at most partners is still low. This is thought partly due to the level of fees set by Anglia Ruskin compared to their local competitors. This has been raised in the S.M.A.R.T. Action Plan as an issue for Management. Student performance and engagement will also continue to be monitored. See also 7 (iii) below.

HND Graphic Design (COWA, Isle campus) An action plan was prepared in response to the External Examiner’s report expressing concerns with regard to the marking process (and in particular the preparation of staff for the marking process), standards achieved on the major project and the use of visiting lecturers and field trips. The implementation of the plan was to be monitored through the annual monitoring report for the academic year 2006/07. However, the HN pathway has now ceased. The External Examiner associated with this pathway has continued the role for the Anglia Ruskin Dip HE/BA (Hons) Graphic Design and has affirmed ‘at all levels sampled, a fair spread of grades across the different bandings that reflected national norms’. This followed shared benchmarking activities undertaken by the Graphic Design subject teams. In the 2006/07 report, the external examiner states the following: ‘Having flagged up a series of issues in my last report about the provision at Isle College it was heartening to see that the staff team had accepted the critical feedback and felt that actions had been put in place by management to support the staff in implementing change.....It is clear that ‘standards at risk’ are being addressed by staff and management at Isle and Anglia Ruskin with a clear strategy with defined actions…..In general immediate issues of concern have been dealt with and firm plans to deal with longer term issues of support for the Graphic Design programme have been established and rolled out. I feel confident on my visit with staff and management at Isle College and representative from ARU that serious considerations of the issues with the programme and staffing have been adequately dealt with.’

 new issues and action planned to resolve them: where possible, state where the responsibility lies for action and give a time scale.

HND Civil Engineering, King’s Lynn The Programme Leader (Construction) reported that results for three modules (Tendering & Estimating, Engineering Mathematics and IT Applications) differed from the norm, two with a higher mean mark and one with a lower mean. Staff at King’s Lynn have identified measures to address the situation: In IT Applications, students found it difficult to develop their AutoCAD computer drawing skills sufficiently in the hours allowed. The module has therefore been replaced with an individual project. There is a new tutor for the Tendering and Estimating module in 2007/08 and there will be greater use of IT-based systems to improve access to industry- relevant formats. The question of grading criteria is also being addressed. The achievement on Engineering Mathematics has been referred to the Tutor so that the assessment frameworks may be revisited. These issues have been referred to the Associate Dean (Quality) who will monitor the action points.

HNC Construction, (King’s Lynn) The External Examiner observed that surveying equipment needed to be reviewed. The Student Experience Visit Report also noted that Students had expressed disappointment in the technology available to them. The annual monitoring subcommittee has responsibility for overseeing inclusion of the issue within the relevant S.M.A.R.T Action Plan for 2007/08.

(1) HND Computing, (King’s Lynn), HND Information Technology, (King’s Lynn), (Computer Science Programme) (2) HNC/D Business Information Technology, HND Multimedia, (Computing Programme) (1) U.K. collaborative partner intakes, whilst not inconsistent with many similar franchises and past intake

numbers, were reported to be lower than desirable. Course tutors at partner colleges felt that Anglia Ruskin had higher fees than their local competitors and that this had an effect on the intakes. The issue is to be raised, by the Head of Department, with Anglia Ruskin management. It will be monitored by the Head of Department with a target date for achievement of satisfactory fees for partners such that they feel they are competing on an equal footing with competitors, by July 2008.

(2)The HN students have achieved high levels of retention and progression. The main area of concern is the relatively few HN students, particularly part-time, that we are attracting. It is felt that the cost of doing an HN award within Anglia Ruskin and its partners is not attractive compared to other providers. The annual monitoring subcommittee has responsibility for overseeing inclusion of the issue within the relevant S.M.A.R.T Action Plan for 2007/08.

HNC Applied Biology This pathway continued to operate successfully, but recruitment is declining due to changes in employment practice. During the next academic year, attention will be given, by the Programme team, to widening awareness within the local employer base.

6 GOOD PRACTICE Give any examples of good practice at institutional level in relation to BTEC programmes that you wish to draw to the attention of Edexcel, including examples of good practice raised by External Examiners, and Internal and External Reviews of BTEC programmes.

As reported in previous IRRs, the annual monitoring process culminates in a summary report, considered at the April meeting of the Senate, where identified examples of good practice are endorsed for dissemination to our University and wider community. Such examples are identified at Programme (Anglia Ruskin definition) level and do not therefore identify individual pathways from which the examples are drawn. As Anglia Ruskin operates a modular scheme, examples of good practice may be a feature of delivery of a module contributing to more than one pathway. Following consideration of the summary report by the Senate, at it’s meeting of 23rd April 2008, the endorsed examples of good practice will be available and can be provided to supplement this IRR if required.

7 OTHER COMMENTS Mention any points you may wish to make that would not otherwise be covered in the report. If you have received any relevant (non- confidential) reports during the year from bodies external to your institution (eg Collaborative Audit, Professional Accreditation reports, etc.), use this Section to make any comments, or to provide a reference to such reports.

(i) The IRR for 2005/06 reported that following a review of moderation and sampling processes, a ‘Procedural Document’ to support the Code of Practice was being developed to provide staff with a step-by-step guide to the assessment process from the design of assessment tasks to the moderation of assessed work and the final publication of results. The first edition was published in May 2007 and briefing sessions were held across our University during July, September and October 2007 to support the introduction of the Procedural Document which will be implemented in the 2007/08 academic year.

(ii) It was also reported in the 2005/06 IRR that Anglia Ruskin was anticipating its next QAA Institutional Audit in December 2007. It is pleasing to report that our University has received notification from the QAA of a successful outcome of the Institutional Audit.

(iii) HND/C Computing Although collaborative partner student intakes are lower than desirable (see 4 (iii) above), the successes of the students are worthy of noting. Many students seek the opportunity to use such awards to progress to higher awards thus widening participation for students with lower entry qualifications.

Summary Report to the Senate 53 Appendix 8: Edexcel Annual Report