Quality Monitoring Committee
25 February 2009
Paper 3.2
Faculty of SCIENCE
Annual Faculty Academic Quality ASSURANCE
and Enhancement Report
FOR SESSION 2007/08
1Introduction
1.1Please provide an overview of the Quality Assurance structure at Faculty Level.
1.1.1In the Faculty of Science, responsibility for the oversight of Quality Assurance and the Enhancement of the Faculty’s Teaching and Learning provision rests with the Vice-Dean (Academic), acting on behalf of the Dean. This officer attends Senate (if not an elected member) and is a member of the various University committees and groups charged with promoting learning and teaching.
1.1.2The Vice-Dean is assisted by a Faculty committee structure, at the centre of which is the Academic Administration Committee (AAC), to which the Faculty’s Board of Study has delegated the following functions. The Committee
1considers and makes recommendations to the Board of Study on all matters pertaining to learning and teaching, and student administration;
2ensures quality assurance in the design and delivery of courses at all levels, scrutinising programme specifications, curriculum content, regulations andannual course reviews and scrutinising also the outcomes of external assessments including accreditation visits by professional bodies
3monitors and where necessary takes action to enhance the effectiveness of the various processes that affect the student life cycle, whether undergraduate or postgraduate, including the admissions selection process, counselling, the advisers of study system,registration, timetabling, credit-based degree structures, the arrangement of semesters, postgraduate supervision, student-staff committees and all aspects of student feedback
5receives reports from all Boards of Examiners and Appeals Committees on matters relating to student progress and the conduct of degree examinations and where necessary takes action aimed at their enhancement
6receives reports from Faculty Review Groups on matters pertinent to its remit, and advises the Board of Study thereon.
1.1.3AAC is itself served by a number of sub-committees and reports to the Faculty’s Board of Study. Where necessary, recommendations from AAC and the Board on matters pertaining to learning and teaching are forwarded to the University Senate. Annex 1 shows the committee structure in diagrammatic form.
1.2Please comment on how the actions identified in the Faculty’s last Academic Quality Assurance and Enhancement Report have been carried forward and on the impact these have had on the academic quality of the Faculty’s programmes.
1.2.1We identified the following actions in our previous report. Comments are in italics. All are, to varying degrees, positive comments and we believe the overall result has been to further improve the academic quality of the Faculty’s programmes.
(i)Revise all Undergraduate and Integrated Masters regulations in preparation for the new framework, 2009-2010
This process is well underway, with the final regulation updates to ensure that Year 1 students in 2009-10 will benefit from the new framework due to reach Senate in February. Several exemptions from the basic tenets of the framework have been be sought, as departments have tried to balance the demands made by accreditation, enhanced degrees and joint delivery with the need to avoid overloading students.
(ii)Continue to monitor progress in achieving the Educational (and other) objectives of the Faculty’s Strategic Plan
During the second semester of 2007/08, the Faculty’s management met with each academic department to discuss in detail their strategies for learning and teaching (as well as research and knowledge exchange) to ensure consonance with both the Faculty and University Strategic Plans. Other such meetings have followed.
(iii) Consider how to expand flexible delivery including part-time and distance learning courses
The revision of the Undergraduate and Integrated Masters Framework has been used by AAC as an opportunity to ask Departments to adopt a more flexible approach with respect to part-time provision. These requests have been positively received, and several departments are introducing the option of part time study in their regulations from 2009/10. Distance learning is more problematic, especially in the context of the wet sciences - where so much has to be laboratory-based, but it is being looked at, more particularly in the context of postgraduate instructional courses.
(iv)Embed both research-teaching linkages and employability in course curricula.
As above, the revision of the Undergraduate and Integrated Masters Framework has been used as an opportunity to embed research–teaching linkages, the enhancement of graduate attributes (which encompasses employability) and other Funding Council promoted Enhancement themes.Given the pressure that departments have reported in fitting curricula to the new structure (reflected in the requests for exemptions from the Framework, mentioned above),Enhancement themes have tended to be embedded in mainstream classes rather than set out as free-standing classes (as PDP had been in the outgoing structures). Nonetheless, the Faculty is confident (from the programme specifications and class descriptors seen) that departments have embraced the enhancement concept, and that delivery within the core curriculum may nowbe better received and understood by students.
(v)Respond to the Postgraduate Research Experience Survey on its receipt.
We believe University figures were published but not a Faculty breakdown.
(vi)Amend its Annual Course Review forms to include questions re compliance with Disability Equality Scheme.
The Faculty now has 2 Course review forms, for undergraduate and postgraduate (the old ‘one size fits all’ approach had not been satisfactory) and questions about compliance with the University’s Disability Equality Scheme feature in both.
2CYCLICAL REVIEWS
2.1Please list the Departmental Reviews and Excellence Reviews carried out in session 2007/08 (and attach Executive Summaries).
2.1.1The Faculty conducted the quinquennial review of the Department of Pure & Applied Chemistry in session 2007-08. The Review was a very positive experience. The Panel was impressed by the dedication and hard work of all groups of staff in the Department and heard frequent references both to Chemistry’s positive and stimulating academic environment and the high levels of support and encouragement available to students. Annex 2 is an Executive Summary that shows the recommendations of the Panel and the Department’s responses. This document was approved by the Board of Study in May 2008.
There were no Excellence Reviews in the Faculty (but see 2.2 below).
2.2Please detail any significant developments or issues other than those in learning and teaching (which should be dealt with under section 7) arising out of Departmental Reviews or Excellence Reviews conducted in session 2007/08, including any follow up and the Faculty’s proposed response to these.
2.2.1Mention should be made here of Statistics & Modelling Science. Initially earmarked for an Excellence Review, by late 2007 it had been agreed by the University that such an approach would not be appropriate. The Department was healthy academically. Any concerns were about its small size and sustainability. The outcome was an agreement in 2008 that it should merge with the Department of Mathematics. A Merger Implementation Group (with external assessors and chaired by Deputy Principal McDonald) met in June 2008 and an implementation strategy was identified. The departments will merge on 1 August 2009.
2.3Please list any accreditation visits/reviews by Professional and Statutory Bodies that took place during session 2007/08 and report the outcome. If these have made any recommendations in respect of improvements to learning and teaching, how are they to be addressed? If these have highlighted areas of good practice which might be applicable elsewhere in the University, please note these below.
Computer and Information Sciences
2.3.1The British Computing Society confirmed that all degrees offered by the Department of Computer & Information Sciences (CIS) that fall within its ambit are accredited until 2012. Furthermore, graduates of the two MEng degrees will be eligible for Chartered Scientist or Chartered Engineer status. This means that the Computer and Electronic Systems degrees, already accredited by the Institution of Engineering and Technology are ‘double-accredited’.
Mathematics
2.3.2The Institute of Mathematics and its Applications re-accredited the BSc (Honours) Mathematics with Teaching to December 2011, having already accredited the MSci Mathematics and the BSc (Hons) Mathematics two years previously.
Pure & Applied Chemistry
2.3.3All of the Department’s courses eligible for some form of professional recognition are now accredited, following the Forensic Science Society’saccreditation ofthe Department’s integrated masters and postgraduate instructional (PGI) courses in Forensic Science during this year.
2.3.4Several features were commended by the Society, including the substantial investment by the University in accommodation for forensic science and other teaching, the accessibility of staff to students, the CAL resources that support the practical laboratories (‘excellent’), the good practice of using casework examples and in-house research, the integrated guest lectures by practitioners and non-Strathclyde academics to support the teaching by in-house staff, and those practicals in the MSc that provide critical assessment of court reports and associated correspondence. However, there were recommendations, among them that interior rooms should be used for crime scene work rather than outside locations (Stepps is used at present). Discussions are underway with Estates Management to explore how this can be achieved.
Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences (SIPBS)
2.3.5The Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain(RPSGB) will not accredit the longstanding 5+3 semester model Collaborative MPharm degree with the InternationalMedicalUniversity at Kuala Lumpur, as the students spend insufficient time in the UK. However, in July 2007 the RPSGB agreed to accept for 5 year accreditation the new 4+4 semester version of the Collaborative MPharm (usually called the 2+2 model).This allowedrecruitment to start, and the first cohort began its studies in January 2008. A further accreditation visit to Kuala Lumpur took place in July 2008 and the third will be in 2009. The 2+2 version is proving a great success.
2.3.6Following discussions during an accreditation follow-up meeting in April 2008, the MPharm Management Committee (MPMC) agreed from 2008-09to include student representatives in its membership. Specifically, elected representatives from 2nd and 4th years of the MPharm students will be routinely involved in consideration of MPMC business, with the exception of any reserved business.
2.3.7The Practice Certificate in Independent Prescribing was accredited in 2008 by the RPSGB and by NHS Education Scotland, for three years.
2.3.8In Spring 2008,the Institute of Biomedical Sciences (IBMS) agreed to accredit for five years from session 2008/09 the BSc Honours degree in Biomedical Science (renamed from ‘Biomedical Sciences’) offered by SIPBS. The University has not previously had degrees approved by this body which praised the quality of provision in SIPBS and the cohesion of the teaching team.
******
2.3.9None of the above accreditations involved anything more than minor recommendations. By the close of 2007-08, all Faculty departments could say that almost all of their principal degrees were accredited by an appropriate professional body.
3University Guidelines, Policies and Procedures
3.1Are there any areas in which Faculty practice was not consistent with the University’s Policies and Procedures for Teaching and Learning or with any of the supplementary Guides listed below? If so, please give details and the reasons for deviating from normal University practice in each instance.
Academic Strategy 2006-09 (May 2006)
Policy and Code of Practice for Collaborative Courses leading to Award or Joint Awards of the University and Flexible and Distributed Learning (including e-learning) (June 2005)
Procedures and Guidelines for Course and Class Approval (December 2003)
Dealing with Applications from Students with Criminal Convictions (November 1999)
Dealing with Instances of Possible Academic Dishonesty (November 2001)
Procedures and Guidelines for Faculty Board Reports to Senate (March 2004)
Internal Review of Learning and Teaching and Annual Faculty Academic Quality Reports (February 2006)
Guidelines and Procedures for the Management of Support for Undergraduate and Postgraduate Disabled Students (March 2005)
Policy and Code of Practice for Postgraduate Research Programmes (May 2005)
Procedures and Guidelines for Postgraduate Instructional Programmes (December 2003)
Guidelines for Examiners of Research Degrees (October 2005)
Policy, Procedures and Guidelines for Summative Assessment (May 2005)
Framework for Professional Doctorates (December 2005)
Procedures and Guidelines for External Examiners (October 2005)
Student Complaints Procedure (May 2007)
Policy on Students’ External Engagement (November 2006)
3.1.1We believe all our procedures are in line with the University policies and procedures noted above.
3.2Are there any aspects of the guides to policies and procedures which the Faculty believed required reviewing? If so, please give details.
3.2.1During 2007-08, the Faculty sought clarification of the Postgraduate Research Programmes policies and procedures with respect to pre-viva critiques and reports – their timing and the circumstances under which issues raised by the examiners in these reports should be drawn to the attention of the student. The debate on this continued at the Quality Monitoring Committee in session 2008-09.
3.2.2The Faculty raised in its previous report the suggestion that thePolicy and Code of Practice for PG Research Programmes and the Guidelines for Examiners of Research Degrees might be revised and possibly combined into a single document. This would still be its recommendation.
4Admissions
In completing this section, Faculties should refer to the standard annual datasets produced by the Planning Office.
4.1Please comment on trends in respect of Undergraduate, Postgraduate Instructional and Postgraduate Research admissions. Within this analysis please comment specifically on the following for session 2007/08:
-the breakdown of entrant students (mature, overseas, ethnic origin, gender balance, disability, intake from non-standard backgrounds – i.e. Wider Access programmes/FE colleges etc);
-changes in mode of study (ft/pt/dl) required by students;
-general entrance standards.
4.1.1Undergraduate (full-time only)*
IntakePopulation
2005/062006/072007/082005/062006/072007/08
Home802.5801.0784.02469.02531.52637.0
Overseas120.0124.0132.0155.0157.0172.0
Total922.5925.0916.02624.02688.52809.0
* From the University’s published statistics (Secretariat-Planning) year–end for 2005/06 - 2007/08. As published, those for 2005/06 are misleading as they omit the June 2006 intake on the Collaborative MPharm programme. Those students are correctly included in the 2005/06 population figure, but so too is the June 2005 intake. The figures that are shown here correct these errors.
UG Admissions- General Comments
4.1.2The Faculty’s target for 2007/08 was 760. As usual, to cope with no-shows and early withdrawals, selectors were encouraged to overshoot by a small margin, with the knowledge of the University. On this occasion, the shortfall did not occur to the expected extent, leaving the Faculty with an intake of 784. Setting aside the negative fiscal implications, this was a good result from the perspective of engaging applicants with the Faculty. Success could be attributed to the continuation of the successful ‘Science at Strathclyde’ recruitment events in February and March 2007 for those applicants holding offers. The Faculty also continued to contact applicants holding conditional offers (COs) immediately after the publication of school exam results in August, to ensure good students were not lost to the University. It also encouraged applicants who had narrowly missed their CO to transfer to degrees in related areas (eg from Pharmacy to a Biomedical Sciences degree). Colleagues in Schools & Colleges Liaison, among them the special recruitment officer for the Engineering and Science faculties (Ms E Malcolmson), continued to make a positive contribution, as did key staff in Registry.
4.1.3In 2006/07, the average points score presented by entrants to Sciencewas 476, slightly ahead of the University’s average of 468. The methodology of recording this performance indicator changed for 2007/08. Of 766 entrantsrecorded (not 784 as above), 499 or 65% had in excess of 360 points, 341 (45%) had in excess of 420 points, 212 (28%) had in excess of 480 and 108 (14%) had in excess of 540. This is very close to the University average – for example, across the 5 faculties, of 2956 acceptances, 1905 or 64% had in excess of 360 points and 1350 (46%) had in excess of 420 points.
UG Admissions - Overseas Recruitment
4.1.4The overwhelming majority of the Faculty’s overseas undergraduate entrants arrive via the Combined Pharmacy programme with the InternationalMedicalUniversity in Kuala Lumpur (IMU). Entry to the traditional 5+3 semester model is in June and in 2008 the figure was 117. The accreditation of the new 2+2 model by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain reflects the fundamental high qualityof this degree (the first cohort of this new model will not reach Strathclyde until October 2009). However, there are indications that the IMU arrangement is facing ever more competition from other providers. There has been a downturn in the most recent recruitment round in Kuala Lumpur and the implications of this will feature in future reports.
4.1.5A much smaller cohort of students from Oman takes the standard ‘Home’ version of the MPharm degree. An articulation agreement with Donghua University, China, produced a first cohort of around half a dozen students for the BSc Maths and Statistics degrees in 2007/08. The remaining overseas Undergraduate students come as individuals, not as part of a programme.
4.1.6Most of these overseas students perform very well, though there are occasional difficulties, often to do with the distance between them and their families. The Faculty, assisted by the International and Graduate Office, does all it can to ease these students’ difficulties.
4.1.7The International Student Barometer results for Science indicate that, in line with the results for the University as a whole, there are several areas that could be improved. Many are University-wide rather than Faculty-specific issues, including the desire for a welcome reception, better induction, improved learning support, better learning spaces, more language support, improved halls of residence, improved welfare (including safety both personal and security in the halls), and improved catering and careers advice. Respondents were also asked to what extent they would encourage others to come to Strathclyde and compared to other faculties the Faculty of Science showed the most positive results.
UG Admissions-Mature
4.1.8Data for 2007/08 are not available. Previously available data on mature (>25) entrants in 2006 showed the Faculty continuing to attract fewer mature students than the University average, and its share was not growing: 3.7% in 2004/05, 3.5% in 2005/06 and 3.6% 2006/07, based on full-time undergraduate admissions, against the corresponding figures for the University as a whole of 6.4%, 7.1% and 7.9% respectively. This is perhaps not surprising since the study of Science at HE level requires the foundation of recent study of the school curriculum (or equivalent) and this is probably not an easy thing for mature candidates to achieve.