University of Edinburgh
College of Humanities and Social Science
Postgraduate Studies Committee
Minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 14 May 2008
Present: PG Dean (Convener) Professor Chris Clark
ACE PG Director Dr Richard Williams
Divinity PG Director Dr Susan Hardman Moore
EDU PG Director Dr Pat McLaughlin
Health PG Director Mr Seamus Prior
HCA PG Deputy Director Dr Ewen Cameron
LAW PG Director Dr Niamh Nic Shuibhne
LLC PG Director Dr Andrew Newman
PPLS PG Director Dr Simon Kirby
SPS PG Deputy Director Dr Kate Orton-Johnson
Head College PG Office Mr Rick Kiralfy
PG Office Administrator Dr Erin McGibbon Smith (Secretary)
In attendance:
ACE PG Secretary Mrs Catherine Carmichael
LLC PG Administrator Mrs Kate Marshall
PPLS PG Admin. Assistant Miss Katie Keltie
MSE MSC Programmes Manager Ms Caroline Duff
SPS PG Administrator Mrs Sue Grant
CHSS Deputy Registrar Mrs Janet Rennie
CHSS PGO Administrator Mr Liam Forbes
CHSS PGO Administrator Ms Kirsty Woomble
EUCLID Business Analyst Morag Iannetta
EUCLID Functional Expert Mike Calvert
EUCLID Project Board Member Professor Lorraine Waterhouse
1 – Apologies
Apologies were received from Adam Burns (Research Student Representative), Professor Frank Cogliano (HCA PG Director) Ms Nura Ghaeni (Taught Student Representative), Dr Tony Kinder (MSE PG Director), Dr Sophia Lycouris (Edinburgh College of Art), and Professor Jan Webb (SPS PG Director).
2 – Minutes of the meeting of 16 April 2008
The minutes were accepted as a correct record.
3 – EUCLID Presentation
Mike Calvert and Morag Iannetta gave a presentation outlining EUCLID’s priorities for postgraduate admissions and the core admissions roles, showing screen shots of how EUCLID will appear for academics making admissions recommendations.
The EUCLID team reminded the committee that they can contact EUCLID via their Change and Communications Team. Contact details are available on the EUCLID website at http://www.euclid.ed.ac.uk/Contacts/index.cfm.
The Committee questioned the advisability of having a firm date by which students are required to reply to their admissions offer. They also queried how the University would be able to verify the originality of supporting documentation that is uploaded to EUCLID. The EUCLID team confirmed that the University will retain the option to request original documentation from all students.
4 – Matters arising
4A – PGT admissions criteria
All ten Schools had made a decision regarding whether or not to require the submission of two references for all admissions applications. Eight Schools had decided that references would remain a mandatory part of the application process. PPLS had decided that references would remain a mandatory part of the application process for all but three programmes. HCA had decided that references would not be required for admission to any of their taught PG programmes.
It was clarified that changes to this decision could be made in the future with the approval of the CPGSC, but that changes could only be made to take effect from the end of an academic session.
4B – Fee staging
Mr Kiralfy was still in the process of clarifying this issue with Registry.
Action Item 4B: Mr Rick Kiralfy to clarify this issue with Registry and report back.
4C – Draft conclusions of Architectural Alignment Validation Event (Paper 2007/5/1)
A draft report of the Validation Panel for the Alignment of Architectural Education in East-Central Scotland had been circulated to the Committee. The Committee approved the draft report in principle.
4D – Language Training
Dr Newman had only heard back from the School of Divinity regarding possible changes to the language training provision for next academic session. The question was raised whether these courses would be credit bearing. If they were not, then the normal teaching allocation calculation would apply. It was confirmed that at present the courses were not credit bearing. Funding for the courses would be collected from Schools through electronic internal transfers (EITs). Schools would not be able to charge students who attended the courses.
5 – QQR in SPS, final report (Paper 2007/5/7)
The final report for the QQR in SPS had been circulated to the panel. SPS reported that they were pleased with the outcome of the review and had found it to be a positive experience. They recommended, however, that in future the QQR requirements are changed to reduce the excessive volume of paperwork required from Schools. Thanks were given to Professor Jan Webb, the Postgraduate Director, and Dr Fiona Mackay, the former Deputy Postgraduate Director, for their hard work preparing for the review.
It was clarified that QQR panels did not have the authority to enforce their recommendations. It was questioned how much visibility the recommendations have to the Head of College. It was reported that all QQR reports would be seen at the College PR Committee, the College QAE Committee, the Senatus QAE Committee, and the SPGSC.
It was noted that SPS had become the core provider of research training for the College. Even with the resources of such a large School they faced many challenges in providing teaching. This underlined the increasing importance of strengthening ties across the College. Two issues of particular note in the report were the recommendations to organise the School’s teaching provision around a central strategy and the issues of authority within the School. These issues were particularly significant for the Committee as they were relevant to all Schools in the College. The Committee vocalised some frustration that the Schools had made significant progress in a range of areas since the restructuring from Faculties to Colleges/Schools, and they felt that their efforts would be lost if they were asked to restructure again.
The Dean commended the report and invited the Postgraduate Directors to share it with their colleagues.
6 – QQR in LLC, School response (Paper 2007/5/2)
The Committee agreed that the School of LLC had provided a robust reply to the School’s QQR report.
7 – QQR draft timetable for 2008/13 (Paper 2007/5/3)
A draft timetable for the next round of quinquennial reviews of postgraduate provision in each of the ten schools had been circulated to the Committee. Concern was raised that the scheduled time for the review in HCA potentially conflicted with the date set for moving the School to a new facility. It was noted that the previous reviews in the Schools of HCA, ACE, and MSE occurred at approximately the same time, and it might be possible to exchange dates between these three Schools.
Action Item 7: Dr Erin McGibbon Smith to clarify this issue with the School of HCA and enquire whether their review date could be exchanged with another School.
8 – External examiner payment scheme (Paper 2007/5/4)
The College PG Office had developed a new system for payment of taught external examiner fees which took into account both the number of students and the number of courses examined. It was questioned whether all fields needed to be completed in the ‘Nomination Form for the Appointment of External Examiners’, and it was clarified that it was acceptable for Schools to note on the form where some information (such as the number of dissertations examined) was unknown. These details would be confirmed each year by the College PG Office before examiners were paid.
9 – Interim report from the Humanities Skills Training Scoping Study (Paper 2007/5/5)
The Humanities Skills Training Scoping Study was designed to bring academics together across School boundaries to form a central strategy and an awareness of training needs and provision in the College. Two key issues of concern for the Committee were the promotion and facilitation of sharing information on courses across the College and ensuring that money followed resources. The language training courses (Item 4D) was one example of the issues raised by this study.
The interim report of the study had been circulated to the Committee. The report recommended that the College Office and/or transkills should organise an informal meeting of staff responsible for organising postgraduate training courses in the humanities in August. The interim report was approved by the Committee.
Action Item 9: Dr Erin McGibbon Smith and Ms Kirsty Woomble to schedule a meeting for August (a date has now been sent for 19 August).
10 – New programme: MSc Advancing Nursing Practice (Paper 2007/5/6)
During the current academic year the School of HEA had run two taught MSc programmes in nursing: the MSc/Dip in Nursing and the MSc/Dip in Nursing (Mental Health). It was decided to take a radical approach to update these programmes. The proposed new MSc in Advancing Nursing Practice addressed themes that had recently been highlighted by the government. It was a flexible, rigorous programme, designed to be attractive to the recipients of the new early career fellowships for newly qualified nurses.
The Committee approved the proposal contingent upon receipt of all required programme documentation.
Action Item 10: Mr Seamus Prior to forward all required programme documentation to Mr Rick Kiralfy.
11 – Proposed working group on PhD examination reports
It had been noted that there was a considerable variance in the way that examiners interpreted their brief, and that many failed adequately to understand the University’s rules and regulations. This had been further exacerbated by the complexity and ambiguity of the examination report forms. It had also been recommended in the report for the QQR in LLC ‘that the College should reassess the processes for annual reviews’.
It was decided that the Dean would convene a working group to address both of these issues.
Action Item 11: The Convenor to organise a Working Group on PhD Examination Reports.
12 – Report from the SPGSC (8 May 08)
12A – PG research scholarships
The Senatus Working Group on Postgraduate Recruitment had developed an idea for a new, unconventional, form of scholarship that would offer students teaching opportunities along with scholarship income. The teaching involved would be structured and more formal than casual tutoring. This idea had been remitted to Corporate Human Resources who were investigating the legal parameters for these scholarships. If this idea was approved Schools would be able to devise scholarship packages with teaching elements.
The School of PPLS had developed a similar scholarship in the subject area of Philosophy. Two such awards would be offered from September 2008. A similar programme had also been developed in the School of Divinity.
Action Item 13A: The Schools of PPLS and Divinity to report back to the CPGSC on their experience with the scholarships in 12 months.
12B – Policy on use of languages other than English in theses and dissertations
Academic Affairs had proposed a regulation stating that ‘all work submitted for assessment must be written in the English language, except for those courses and classes where the School handbook specifies that written work can and/or should be submitted in the language which is being studied’. This had been approved at SPGSC but had not been approved at SUGSC or APC because there was concern that Gaelic was not given the same status as English.
The Committee voiced some concern that this issue should be reconsidered at SPGSC.
Action Item 13B: The Convenor to write to the convenor of SPGSC to request that SPGSC reconsider their decision to approve the proposed regulation.
13 – PG Office update
13A – APC
Explanations of Additional Programme Costs had been received from all Schools.
13B – College Awards 2009
The College planned to use a different calculation method for Studentship quotas in 2009, which would count student numbers for the previous full year (1 Sep 07 – 31 Aug 08) rather than census date information (from Dec 08) which would cover only those PhD students registered in the first quarter.
13C – English Language Requirements for Postgraduate Study
The PG Admin Forum paper regarding English Language Requirements for Postgraduate Study had been approved by the SPGSC. It was now available at:
http://www.hss.ed.ac.uk/Postgraduate/prospective/englang.htm
13D – Award of distinction
Clarification guidance on the award of distinction for MSc by Research and MSc Taught Programmes had been circulated to PG Directors. It was now available at:
http://www.hss.ed.ac.uk/Postgraduate/infostaff/PraticalGuide/documents/AwardofDistinctionforMasters-Guidance.rtf
14 - Any other business
The Postgraduate Dean was due to demit his post at the end of July, and this was to be his last CPGSC. It had been mentioned at the previous meeting that he would not immediately be replaced, but instead his role would be split into teaching and research, with the postgraduate taught element falling under the remit of the current Dean of Undergraduate Studies (Professor Jake Ansell) and the research element falling under the remit of the Dean of Research (Professor Hector MacQueen). With the recent appointment of Professor April McMahon as the new Head of College this arrangement may now be revisited.
The School Postgraduate Directors unanimously reported that they were opposed to this arrangement and would instead welcome the appointment of a replacement Postgraduate Dean. Their arguments for maintaining the College’s current administrative structures were as follows:
1) If the postgraduate administrative structures changed at the College level then they would also have to change at the School level. This would call into question the existence of graduate schools.
2) There had been a considerable amount of work put into the development of Graduate Schools across the College over the past five years. It seemed premature to change the overall structure of the Schools before they have been able to solidify the current arrangements and measure their success.
3) The current structure allowed for helpful connections between PGT and PGR which played a vital role in the conversion of PGTs into PGRs.
4) By joining undergraduate and postgraduate teaching the College risked the possibility of devaluing both, as one might get preferential treatment over the other. There was a perception that traditionally the University had been focused on UG teaching and that PGT may have been seen as less important. There was also a fear that PGT would become the priority because it was more profitable. They require different approaches.
5) Even if PGT was divorced from PGR, there would still need to be split administration for the two types of teaching.
6) PGT students want to be seen as postgraduates and will not appreciate being treated as something less than a postgraduate.
Next meeting: Wednesday 1 October, 2:00 pm, 4/22, St John's Land, School of Education, Holyrood
1
K:\HSS\General\Postgrad\Committees\CPGSC\CPGSC 2008-9\1.10.08\Minutes 14 May 2008.doc