Annual Faculty AQER forEngineering – February 2008

Annual Faculty Academic Quality ASSURANCE and Enhancement Report session 2006/07

Faculty of engineering

1Introduction

1.1Overview of QA structure at Faculty Level

The Faculty monitors the quality of provision through a system of committees, annual reports, quinquennial departmental reviews and monitoring of annual central performance statistics.

The Academic Administration Committee (AAC) is the main committee responsible for quality assurance. It scrutinises regulation changes, new course proposals and makes recommendations to the Board of Study. It also makes recommendations to the Board of Study on policy issues, for example, amendments to assessment procedures and progress regulations. Departments are required to submit detailed documentation for course changes or proposals to AAC, including detailed module descriptor forms. All changes/new courses must be accompanied by an up-to-date Programme Specification.

As part of the process to progress the Academic Strategy, theFaculty Teaching and Learning Forum came into operation in 2006/07,toconsider Teaching and Learning from a strategic position and facilitate the exchange of good practice in this area throughout the Faculty.

The policy is to conduct course review for all UG and PGI degree courses annually. Outcomes are reported to AAC and the Board of Study. This should facilitate monitoring of developments, tracking of statistical performance and course feedback (from students and external examiners) and create opportunity for the dissemination of good practice across the Faculty. The timing of obtaining this feedback was criticised by departments and after discussion with other Assistant Faculty Officers, it was decided to obtain this feedback via individual meetings with Heads of Department and Course Administrators. A timetable was agreed but unfortunately has been delayed due to staff illness. This review is currently being undertaken.

Departmental reviews, conducted every five years, involve a comprehensive examination of Departmental activities including research, teaching, management and resources. Review reports are presented to the Faculty Planning and Resources Committee and the Board of Study. Departments provide an action plan to FPRC on the recommendations from the review and provide annual updates to FPRC of progress against the action plan.

Central statistics for admissions and progress are monitored at Faculty level through course review. Pass rates for individual classes are monitored by the Vice-Dean Academic through the AGSPEM committee and reported to AAC and the Board of Study. The Vice-Dean Academic also makes annual reports to these committees on External Examiners’ reports (making use of centrally produced summaries) and accreditation reports, sent by Departments to the Faculty Office.

Departments monitor quality of teaching provision through class and course review, departmental teaching committees and ongoing monitoring of feedback from students, external examiners, industrial liaison groups and employers. The outputs from departmental level processes feed into the AAC meetings, Faculty course review and quinquennial departmental reviews.

The Faculty’s position is mapped against the Strategic Objectives in the Academic Strategy in Appendix 1.

1.2Please comment on how the actions identified in the previous year have been carried forward and on the impact these have had on the academic quality of the Faculty’s programmes.

  • Monitor recruitment of PG and International students– Total PGI numbers have been maintained with modest growth (4%). There was a 15% growth in PGR numbers between 2005/6 and 2006/7. Year-end data for PGR students in 2007/8 is awaited before conclusions can be drawn on 2007/8 recruitment. International numbers remained constant at PG level between 2005/6 and 2006/7. There was a marked increase in international UG students numbers, largely arising from Chinese articulation links in EEE.
  • Continue to monitor UG recruitment, entry grades and retention– the policy is now to base targets on previous year’s recruitment, quality of intake, and progression for each department. The Faculty does not want departments to be turning away high calibre students while others are recruiting weaker students and showing lower progression rates.
  • Progress the scoping for an EngineeringGraduateSchool– wide-scale market research was conducted with industry sectors in the Summer of 2007. This produced clear evidence of need for additional PG programmes. A number of MSc courses have now being developed for introduction in 2008/9. A governance structure is being developed and an official launch is planned for October 2008.

1.3Please detail any significant developments or issues arising out of departmental reviews conducted in the last session, including any follow up and the Faculty’s proposed response to these.

In April 2007 the Faculty conducted Departmental Reviews of the Department of Naval Architecture and Engineering (NAME)and the Department of Design, Manufacture and Engineering Management (DMEM).

Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering

The Report from the NAME review, together with the departmental response, was presented to the Faculty Planning Committee. There are no significant developments or issues arising from this review. Appendix 2 contains an executive summary of the review and the recommendations made by the Panel. The Faculty is satisfied that all recommendations can be enacted and that substantial progress on the majority of recommendations has already been made.

This was the first review of NAME since the merger of the former Strathclyde department of Ship and Marine Technology and the GlasgowUniversity department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering in August 2001. The Department had undergone a period of reorganisation following the merger, and staffing levels had fluctuated in the review period but had stabilised at 14 fte academic staff. The Henry Dyer building had been refurbished and was well-equipped for research and teaching.

International students make up 40% of the UG cohort and there are numerous opportunities for growth in PG international student income. This source of funding is very important to the Department. The UG portfolio is being monitored, particularly with regard to the BSc in Nautical Sciences which has lower entry standards than other courses. Further development of the MSc portfolio is planned once the new Head of Department is in place in August 2007. NAME has developed strong links with Ngee Ann Polytechnic in Singapore and a direct entry agreement to BEng Honours programmes has so far produced 98 graduates.

Research income has greatly increased since 2001 and is now at an average of £100k per fte per annum. The Department was encouraged to pursue greater interaction with the Faculties of Engineering at Strathclyde and Glasgow to balance activities with external bodies. In addition, a rebalancing of the research portfolio to achieve greater income from EPSRC is required.

The Department was advised to pay attention to UG student satisfaction, in particular senior students, to ensure consistency of treatment. This has now been addressed by the department.

It was recommended that the Student Staff committee be reorganised such that support staff became responsiblefor the minutes and training was given (perhaps through the Students Association) for student conveners. The Department has arranged to provide secretarial support, and student Conveners will be offered training. Student-Staff committee minutes will be considered by the Department Management Committee.

The Department was asked to ensure it responds adequately to comments made by External Examiners and in particular that comprehensive solutions to examination questions be provided. In response, all academic staff have been instructed to provide to the External Examiners more detailed model answers to examination questions in line with discussions at the Honours Board.

At the Review, it was unclear whether the Department had a designated Disability co-ordinator, but it has been confirmed that a staff member has this responsibility.

The Department was advised to give consideration to the integration of student cohorts from second year onwards to take account of direct intakes to courses from international and other sources. To help integration, evening and weekend sport and social activities will be organised through the Student-Staff Committee and students with different backgrounds will be mixed in group project work.

The full report, recommendations and departmental response are being reported to the Quality Monitoring Committee.

Design, Manufacture and Engineering Management

The Report and departmental response from the DMEM review was presented to the Faculty Planning Committee. The review highlighted the need to appoint new staff members to replace those who had left. The Faculty is satisfied that this is being addressed and once achieved, will contribute to progress in meeting the other recommendations made. Appendix 3 contains an executive summary of the review and the Panel’s recommendations.

Overall, the Department is in a healthy financial position. A major refurbishment programme is underway which will consolidate all research accommodation into one single DMEM research suite and develop a cohesive DMEM laboratory suite. There is an extensive range of new equipment which has enhanced facilities for staff and students.

Following the review, the Department has completed its analysis of the UG course portfolio with the aim of developing more commonality in the structure of courses and improving teaching efficiency. There are opportunities for growth in PG courses especially with international students. PhD completion rates have greatly improved since the last review.

DMEM has good links with industry and start-up research is often inspired by industry-engendered ideas. The Department is working to ensure this strength is more widely recognised by potential industrial partners. There is strong involvement in EU networks and Knowledge Transfer Partnerships. To improve the balance of activities, the Department will pursuemore EPSRC funding.

The report has been submitted to the department for factual errors and is being processed through the Faculty Committee structure. The full report, recommendations and departmental response are being reported to the Quality Monitoring Committee.

1.4Please detail any changes made in respect of learning and teaching arising from therecommendations of departmental reviews undertaken in the previous two sessions and evaluate their success in addressing the issues raised by the review.

Architecture

PG Student Recruitment

The Department was advised to grow its population of Home and Overseas postgraduate students, as stated in the self-assessment, and consider how the PG portfolio could best be marketed overseas. Visits to international partner institutions have resulted in an increase in international student recruitment. The new MSc in Urban Design is recruiting strongly. A new collaborative agreement has been signed with Taylors College, Malaysia.

BSc Architectural Studies with European Studies

It was recommended that the Department review the inclusion of the ‘with European Studies’ BSc programme within the portfolio. The European Studies course is being withdrawn and will be replaced by a new BSc Architectural Studies with International Study.

Pass Degree Portfolio

The portfolio of the Pass degree students has now been credit rated and the role of the External Examiner in the degree award has been clarified.

Excellence Review

Architecture has undergone an Excellence Review, recommendations have been made and the Faculty is providing full support to the Department to implement these recommendations.

Civil Engineering

Structural Engineering

An interim accreditation visit by the Joint Board of Moderators is due to take place in March 2008. The visit is expected to focus on the areas of perceived weakness from the previous full accreditation visit in 2004. Weaknesses, relating to staff shortages, were identified in the core area of Structural Engineering. Negotiations involving the Dean and Head of Department on possible appointments to further address this issue are currently taking place.

First Year Retention

Retention improved following the allocation of more resources to the first year for laboratory classes, tutorials and coursework, and attendance monitoring.

Mechanical Engineering

Pass Rates

The review flagged up some classes in the Dynamics subject stream where the pass rate was often below 70%. A review was undertaken and a new approach using standard text-books with online support material was put in place from 2nd year onwards. The results for 2006/07 were:

Feb 07July 07Sep 07

ME206-91% (153 students)-

ME30575% (120 students)77% (119 students)97% (116 students)

1641578% (118 students)80% (116 students)89% (114 students)

‘Over-Teaching’

The Department’s pass and progression rates have been acceptable over a two year period and no adverse criticism has been made by students relating to over teaching. It is felt that the feedback given at the time of the review by a small subset of the students may not representative of both the student perceptions and the realities.

1.5Where recent departmental reviews have highlighted areas of good practice which might be applicable elsewhere in the University, please provide detail of these below.

DMEM

To strengthen retention rates, DMEM has concentrated on the early first year experience and encourages students to socialise from the first day of semester 1. As well as meeting with their advisers, first year students attend fortnightly workshops on topics such as summer placements. Similar workshops will be offered to all year groups from 2007/08 at set times.

The Department is strong in community and pastoral care. In the past, students tended to return to former, more familiar Year Advisers when they had a problem, rather than seeing their current Adviser, so a new system of maintaining Year Advisers with the same class all the way through the course has been introduced. This enables staff to get to know students better and provides better care for personal circumstances and medical difficulties, saving students from having to explain their situation to a new Adviser each year. It also gives staff an improved overview as it allows them to experience all years of a course and learn its structure.

1.6Please comment on the Faculty’s engagement with the current quality enhancement themes (The First Year, Flexible Delivery, Integrative Assessment, Research-Teaching Linkages).

The First Year Experience (2005-07)

A Faculty-funded MPhil project to study First Year Student Retentionamong engineering students was completed in March 2007. Entitled ‘The relationship between retention and transition between school and university’, the study surveyed the first year student cohorts from sessions 2005/6 and 2006/7, analysing their background and ability to cope with first year university based on academic results from Boards of Examiners. The study evaluated a range of social and academic categories and identified 3 factors as highly significant in determining a student’s likelihood of success:

-The withdrawal rate for students that were first generation was nearly double that of those who were not first generation;

-The withdrawal rate for students who did not realise that there would be a difference in teaching methods at university prior to attending was considerably higher than for those who did;

-Students with Advanced Highers achieved a higher first time pass rate than those without advanced qualifications, and they also had a lower withdrawal rate. The better their results on entry to University, the better the pass rate and the lower the withdrawal rate.

It was also apparent during the study that results varied considerably according to the department in which a student was based. Analysis was performed at department level and results provided to first year student advisers.

Students from GOALS schools had a very high instance of passing all subjects at the first attempt. GOALS students received some additional support during induction and the Faculty is considering extension of this practice to other ‘at-risk’ categories. The findings on the disadvantage of being a first generation student could be relayed to school guidance teachers with a view to improving their preparation for University entry.

There is a trend towards more students studying sixth year subjects, however sixth year students often opt out of study on receipt of unconditional offers. The survey showed that sixth year students who did not complete sixth year qualifications were more likely to fail in first year. This has clear implications for selection policies, and highlights the importance of promoting Advanced Higher completion as it affects students’ attitude and maturity. Second year entry for sixth year applicants is also being considered.

The study suggested that a ‘buddy system’ or peer support could help first generation students, but unless this is an online system, it is only practical in those departments where use of Disclosure Scotlandis already the norm.

The Faculty is looking closely at the findings with a view to taking them forward. Interest has been expressed outwith the Faculty in this project and copies of the thesis have been made available when requested.

The Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering (EEE) is involved in an EPSRC project “Engineering the Future” which has completed the first of three years of systematic investigation of the interface between school and university in the specific context of electronic and electrical engineering. Extensive liaison has been established with schools in several local authorities; each school is associated with one or more staff within the department. Curricular material is being developed by schools to introduce engineering to pupils as a choice of university course and professional career.