CONTENTS
2.0 Student Feedback Survey Forms
3.0 Coursework Code of
Practice
o
3.1 Introduction
o
3.2 Plagiarism
o
3.3 Departmental procedure for
Coursework collection and return
o
3.4 Code of
practice for group coursework and Peer review
5.0 Annual and Periodic Programme Reviews
6.0 Department Code of
Practice for Staff Student Committees
7.0 Quality Audit Action Sheets
8.0 Amending module specifications
10.0 Examination paper second readers
11.0 Double Marking of
examination scripts
12.0 Code of practice for
modular assessment
13.0 Examination performance feedback
This document contains details of the
Quality Assurance procedures of the Department of Civil and Building
Engineering. These procedures have been produced in accordance with the University's Academic
Quality Procedures and the procedures by the Faculty of Engineering.
If you are a member of the Administration
Team, a Programme Tutor or Internal Examiner for a module then it is important
that you read these procedures carefully and become fully aware of your
responsibilities.
If you teach on any module or are involved
with the administration within the Department you should also be conversant
with these formal procedures.
If there are any parts of this document or
the procedures therein about which you are unclear, you should consult the
Departmental Quality Co-ordinator in the first instance and if unavailable the
Departmental Executive Officer or the Head of Department.
Return to QA Contents list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
The following is a quick reference list of
example forms included in this handbook.
(D means a departmentally produced sheet and copies are held by the DEO, and
U means a University produced sheet - see http://www.lboro.ac.uk/admin/ar/templateshop/)
Module Feedback Sheet OCR Form (U)
Module Breakdown Sheet (U)
Module Survey Header Sheet (D)
Student
Feedback Batch Header Sheet (U)
Module Survey Summary Sheet (D)
Degree Programme Survey Header Sheet (D)
Degree Programme Survey Sheet OCR Form (U)
Degree Programme Summary Sheet (D)
Degree Breakdown Sheet (U)
Module
Review Form (D)
Undergraduate
Annual Programme Review Form (U)
Postgraduate
Annual Programme Review Form (U)
Quality Audit Action Sheet (D)
Proposal
documentation for New or Revised Programmes (U)
Amended
Programme Regulations, New or Amended Modules (U)
Coursework
Check Sheet (U)
Coursework feedback and marking scheme (U)
Report
Assessment Feedback Form (U)
Oral
Presentation Feedback Form (U)
Examination
Second Reader Sheet (D)
Examination and Coursework Double Marking Sheet (D)
Student
Project Assessment Sheet (D)
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
This document provides details of the
systems used within the department to:
Please note that relevant forms referred to
in this document may be obtained direct from the University’s web site at http://www.lboro.ac.uk/admin/ar/templateshop/
Before reading this document you should be
conversant with the principal roles of those involved with the Quality
Assurance within the department.
Overall responsibility for the Quality
Assurance Procedures and their role in improving the learning and teaching
process within the department resides with the Head of Department. It is the
role of the Quality Co-ordinator to develop and implement systems to meet both
the requirements of the Head of Department and the University Administration.
The Departmental Executive Officer is responsible for the operation of the
systems.
The Undergraduate Learning and Teaching
Committee (ULTC) and Postgraduate Learning and Teaching Committee (PLTC) are
responsible for investigating new initiatives to enhance the quality of
learning and teaching within the department. Responsibility for each individual
programme rests with the Programme Tutor. The maintenance of teaching standards
for each module is the responsibility of the Internal Examiner of the module.
All staff who teach on a module are expected to
contribute to the success of the module and help to enhance the standard of
learning and teaching provided.
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
Formal feedback from
students within the department by the use of questionnaires as outlined by the University's
Student Feedback Questionnaires - Code of Practice. This information is obtained by two different types
of survey form:
The documents are completed by students, and
the quantitative survey data analysed electronically using an optical mark
reader, (OMR).
To obtain the feedback in an efficient and
effective manner procedures have been developed to cover the issue, collection,
analysis and storage of the survey documents.
These procedures are described on the
following pages in this section:
·
2.1 Procedure for the Preparation, Issue,
Return, Analysis and Storage of the Module Survey Sheets
·
2.2 Procedure for the Preparation, Issue,
Return, Analysis and Storage of the Degree Programme Survey Sheets
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
Every module will be surveyed once every
three years on the following rotating basis; 1st year - all modules
in Parts C & D, 2nd year - all modules in Part B and, 3rd
year - all modules in Part A. Exceptions to this will include modules taught
for the first time, and any module identified by the Head of Department.
These procedures are for the preparation,
issue, return and analysis of the Module Survey Sheets. The party responsible
for each stage of the procedure is indicated in brackets alongside the stated
action. Those with responsibilities are:
- the Head of
Department (HoD)
- the Quality Co-ordinator (QC)
- the Departmental Executive Officer (DEO)
- the Internal Examiner (IE)
- the University Computer Centre (CC)
- the Programme Tutor (PT)
2.1.1 Preparation of the Module Survey
Sheets
(i) The
Module Survey Sheets will be prepared by the Departmental Executive Officer
under the guidance of the Quality Co-ordinator. QC/DEO
(ii) The format and
questions of the Module Survey Sheet will be the same for each module within
the department, unless specifically adapted by the Quality Co-ordinator to meet
the requirements of a particular module, (eg
projects, design project, DIS year out)
(iii) The questions used on
the sheets include questions prescribed by the University Administration and
questions determined by the Department. The Department's questions will be
reviewed by the Quality Co-ordinator at the request of the Head of Department. QC/HoD
(iv) Only pre-printed stationary suitable for use with the
optical mark reader may be used for the production of Module Survey Sheets.
2.1.2 The Issue and Return of the Module
Survey Sheets
(i) The Internal
Examiner in conjunction with the Departmental Executive Officer (or their
representative) should decide on an appropriate time to undertake the survey
towards the end of each semester. IE/DEO
(ii) The Departmental
Executive Officer should issue and collect the forms from the students while
the Internal Examiner should
- explain the purpose and usefulness of the survey;
- ask the students to record their responses clearly and accurately;
- provide guidance for them to complete the forms;
- invite them to add additional comments on the rear of the forms. IE/DEO
(iii) The Departmental
Executive Officer should then:
- review the completed forms;
- discard any damaged forms;
- check/correct the position of the data entered and amend where
necessary; and
- complete the Student Feedback Batch Header Sheet and the Module Survey Header
Sheet. DEO
(iv) The Departmental Executive Officer (or their
representatives) should sign the Module Survey Header Sheet to acknowledge
responsibility for the survey documents. - IE
2.1.3 The Analysis and Review of the
Module Survey Sheets
(i) The
sheets for each module will be checked by the Department Executive Officer (or
their representative) for the correct completion of the Batch Header Sheet or
damage to survey sheets which make them unsuitable for processing. Once a
photocopy of written comments on the back of the sheets has been provided to
the Internal Examiner, all sheets will then be forwarded to the Computer Centre
to be read and the results sheet produced DEO
(ii) On the return of the survey sheets from the Computer Centre the Departmental Executive Officer will:
- store the module survey sheets;
- pass a copy of the results to the Internal Examiner; and
- keep a copy of the results sheet on file .
(iii) The Internal Examiner
will summarise the qualitative data collected on the rear of the Module
Feedback Survey Forms and present this data at the Module Review Meeting (See
section 4.0). IE
Actions will be discussed at the Module Review
meeting between the Internal Examiner and the student representatives. IE
Details of the improvements to be made will
be passed to the DEO and the Programme Tutor. IE
It is very important that the
Department can show how details of improvements have been enacted for the
modules. The new HEFCE QA auditing procedure will require us to provide
substantial evidence of this. Please make sure this is carried out and
documented for future reference.
(iv) The Departmental Executive Officer will retain the Survey
sheets and the summary documentation for a minimum of three years. DEO
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
These procedures are for the preparation,
issue, return and analysis of the Degree Programme Survey Sheets. The party
responsible for each stage of the procedure is indicated in brackets alongside
the stated action. Those with responsibilities are:
- Head of
Department (HoD)
- the Quality Co-ordinator (QC)
- Departmental Executive Officer (DEO)
- the University Computer Centre (CC)
- the Programme Tutor (PT)
2.2.1 Preparation of the Degree Programme Survey Sheets
(i) The
Degree Programme Survey Sheets will be prepared by the Departmental Executive
Officer under the guidance of the Quality Co-ordinator. QC/DEO
(ii) The format and details
of the Degree Programme Survey Sheet will be the same for each programme within
the Department.
(iii) The questions used on
the sheets include questions predetermined by the University Administration and
questions determined by the Department. The Departmental questions will be
reviewed by the Quality Co-ordinator at the request of the Head of Department. QC/HoD
(iv) Only pre-printed stationary suitable for use with the
optical mark reader may be used for the production of Degree Survey Sheets.
(v) The Degree Programme
Survey Sheets will be issued by the Departmental Executive Officer to the
Programme Tutor. The sheets and supporting documentation will be distributed in
an appropriate envelope. This envelope will have a Degree programme Survey
Header Sheet. Programme Tutors will be required to sign for receipt of
the sheets and documentation. PT
2.2.2 The Issue and Return of the Degree
Programme Survey Sheets
(i) The
Programme Tutor should, on receipt of the documentation, check that the
contents of the envelope contain:
- sufficient Programme Survey Sheets to survey the students
- a Student Feedback Batch Header Sheet; and
- a Degree Survey Summary Sheet. PT
(ii) The
Programme Tutor should retain the envelope for future use. PT
(iii) The
Programme Tutor should complete the Student Feedback Batch Header Sheet. PT
(iv) The Programme Tutor
should copy the Degree Survey Sheet onto a overhead
projector transparency to provide guidance to the students when they complete
the forms.PT
(v) The Programme Tutor
should decide on an appropriate time to undertake the survey. (This must be
done during or before the last week of the second semester). PT
(vi) The Programme Tutor
should:
- issue of the forms to the students;
- provide guidance for them to complete the forms;
- invite them to add their additional comments on the rear of the forms;
- collect and collate all the forms. PT
(vii) The Programme Tutor
should:
- review the completed forms;
- discard any damaged forms;
- correct the data entry where necessary;
- take note of any obvious feedback indicated by the students responses; and
- read and note the important written comments of the students. (This text will
not be read by the optical mark reader). PT
(viii) The Programme Tutor should
complete the Student Feedback Batch Header Sheet and return all the
documentation and survey sheets to the Departmental Executive Officer. This
should be done as soon as possible after the survey has been undertaken. PT
2.2.3 The Analysis and Review of the
Programme Survey Sheets
(i) The
sheets for each programme will be checked by the Department Executive
Officer. Any unsatisfactory sets of survey sheets will be returned to the
Programme Tutor. DEO
(ii) The survey sheets will
be forwarded to the Computer Centre for reading in appropriate batches within
two weeks of the end of the semester. DEO
(iii) On return of the survey
sheets form the Computer Centre the Department Executive Officer will:
- store the programme survey sheets;
- pass a copy of the results to the Programme Tutor; and
- keep a copy of the results sheet on file.DEO
(iv) The Programme Tutor will review the survey results and
summarise the qualitative data collected on the rear of the Degree Programme
Survey Forms and present this data at the Annual Programme Review Meeting.
The Programme Tutor should suggest
actions considered necessary on the basis of the survey results. Actions will
be discussed at the Annual Programme Review Meeting with Internal Examiners and
other teaching staff. Key issues raised by students through their written
comments on the survey forms, should be considered and recorded in the minutes
of the meeting. These minutes are reviewed by the Head of Department. PT/DEO
Confirmation of the actions to be taken
should be passed to the Head of Department. PT
At the first Staff Student Committee
Meeting, after the Annual Programme Review Meeting, the survey results and
actions taken should be tabled for comment. PT
(v) The Departmental Executive Officer will
retain the Programme Survey sheets and the summary documentation for a minimum
of three years. DEO
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
The distribution of the Module Survey and
Degree Programme survey results are as follows:
• Results from the Module Surveys are passed
to the Internal Examiner of the Module.
• Results from the Degree Programme Surveys
are passed to the Programme Tutor.
• A memo is sent to the Head of Department by
the Quality Co-ordinator summarising the results from the Module Surveys and
highlighting any Module where particular action is required. (This includes any
module where the average response to three or more questions was less than 3.0)
• A memo is sent to the Head of
Department by the Quality Co-ordinator summarising the results from the Degree
Programme Survey and highlighting any Programme where particular action is
relevant.
• The results from the Module
Surveys should be discussed with student representatives at the Module Review.
• The results from the Module
Surveys should be discussed at Student Staff Committee meetings.
• The results from the Module
Surveys and Degree Programme Surveys should be discussed at the Annual
Programme Review.
• Summaries of the results from
the Module Surveys and Programme Degree Surveys will be displayed on
student/departmental notice boards.
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
3.1
Introduction
This code of
practice covers the issue, submission, assessment and return of coursework
within the Department of Civil and Building Engineering. It is based on the University
Coursework Code of Practice as approved by the Teaching and Learning Committee. A
detailed copy of this Code is printed in the Departmental Handbook and a copy
is also held on the Department’s web pages. These pages outline additional
Departmental requirements on University Coursework Code of Practice and must
therefore be read in conjunction with this code.
There is a
specific additional requirement for Postgraduate Programmes with regard to
submission and return, see section 3.3.4
An internal Coursework
Check Sheet is to be used by all staff (from October 2000) for the issue and
return of coursework (copies are held by the DEO).
1. The
Programme Tutors shall include within the Programme Handbooks a schedule of all
the coursework assignments for semester one and will issue a schedule of all
the coursework assignments for semester two at the start of semester two.
2. The
member of staff who sets the coursework assignment shall provide a written
coursework briefing document. This document should include a statement of the
aims and objectives of the assignment and the work required by the student to
meet these objectives. The student will also be informed in writing of how the
work will be assessed and the breakdown of the marks to be awarded. The time
and date for each coursework assignment to be submitted shall be clearly
stated, with an instruction as to whether the coursework is to be submitted via
the departmental standard procedures or directly to the member of staff
responsible for setting the assignment.
3. All
coursework assignments must be submitted in an appropriate folder at the time
and place stated on the coursework-briefing document. The student is
responsible for securely fastening ALL parts of the coursework submission
within the folder.
4. All
coursework assignments must be accompanied by a coursework submission document
signed by the student. This document should form the first page of the
coursework submitted. No coursework will be accepted unless the coursework
submission document is bound within the coursework assignment.
5. Copies
of the coursework submission document will be provided for the students in the
department (see section on coursework collection).
6. The
member of staff who sets the coursework assignment shall make themselves available to the students on both a group and an
individual basis to discuss queries on the coursework.
7. The
Departmental Executive Officer will organise a system of regular collection of
coursework assignments by a departmental representative. This shall be as per
the coursework collection procedure, described later.
8. On
submission of the coursework assignment the coursework submission document will
be countersigned by the person accepting the coursework or stamped with the
departmental stamp to indicate that it has been received.
9. Each
student will sign against their name on a list of students handing coursework
in and will be provided with a receipt stating when the coursework was
submitted. The receipt should be retained by the student as proof of submission
of the coursework.
10. Coursework
not submitted at the correct time and place will be dealt with according to
section 3.3.2 below.
11. Representations for impaired performance must be submitted on a
University Coursework Impaired performance (CIP) form, to the examination’s
office, and in accordance with the notes for guidance, which are stated upon
that form. Note that supporting evidence MUST be provided and this is submitted
directly to the departmental executive officer (DEO). CIP form and guidance
notes
12. The
Departmental Executive Officer shall operate an effective and secure
arrangement for collecting and recording the submission of coursework
assignments and shall maintain a reliable record of those received.
13. The
member of staff responsible for the coursework assignment will maintain a list
showing which students submitted coursework on the submission date and any
coursework received at a later date.
14. The
member of staff who sets the coursework assignment shall arrange for the return
of assignments to students at the time specified in the coursework brief,
usually during a formal teaching session and shall maintain a
reliable record of the coursework returned. Students are expected to sign for
receipt of their returned coursework (see later section). Students who are not
present at that teaching session will be responsible for collecting the
coursework from the member of staff by prior arrangement.
15. The
member of staff responsible for setting the assignment will be responsible for
returning the coursework to the students together with appropriate feedback on
each student's performance. This feedback will be in annotated format and
include guidance on why the grade was given, how it could have been improved,
and what should have been done to achieve an ‘excellent’ grade. The
communication of the grade will be individual and confidential except where a
common grade is given for group work. The use of ID numbers for returning
coursework marks is permitted.
16. Any
student with an individual grievance with respect to the coursework should
report such a grievance to the Internal Examiner of the Module. Any group of
students with a grievance should report the grievance to the Internal Examiner
of the module and the Programme Tutor.
17. Where
appropriate, grievances with respect to a coursework assignment should be
discussed at the staff student committee meeting.
18. Coursework
must be the original work of the student submitting the assignment. All work
that has been used from other reports and relevant texts should be
appropriately referenced. Where the member of staff responsible for the
assignment has evidence of plagiarism (see section 3.2 below) then no grade
will be awarded. This will apply to all the relevant coursework
submissions. The Internal Examiner shall then refer the matter to the Head of
Department, after following the procedure on plagiarism. The students involved
may make a representation to the Head of Department should they wish to do so.
19. Internal
Examiners shall where necessary request from individual students that the
original or a copy of the coursework assignment is retained by the Department
for record purposes. Such requests shall not be unreasonably withheld.
20. Coursework
assignments should be set on the following basis. For modules which have a 10
credit weighting the average student might be expected to spend the following
number of hours on the assignment:
|
% of module assessed by coursework |
Contact Hours |
Total number of hours spent on coursework |
|
20% |
33 |
12 |
|
25% |
33 |
15 |
|
30% |
33 |
18 |
|
50% |
33 |
30 |
|
100% |
33 |
45 |
|
100% |
11 |
78 |
Note that for modules with 100% coursework the number
of hours spent on coursework varies with the number of contact hours. For
modules that have a 15 credit weighting apply a factor of 1.5 to the above
figures. For example, a module with a 20% coursework weighting the average
student might be expected to spend 18 hours on the coursework assignments.
21. Coursework
assignments should be assessed and marks awarded on the basis of the marking
schedule provided to the students in the coursework briefing document. Feedback
to the students should include a grade on the basis of the following
scale:
A* 80% or
above
A+ 75%-79%
A 70%-74%
B+ 65%-69%
B 60%-64%
C+ 55%-59%
C 50%-54%
D+ 45%-49%
D 40%-44%
E 30%-39%
F 29%
or below
Important
Note: Grades on returned coursework should always be regarded by the student
and staff as provisional since marks may be subject to moderation.
3.2 Plagiarism
All students
complete a statement of authorship on each coursework submission form. Where a
member of staff suspects that plagiarism has occurred he/she shall interview
the student(s) and investigate. The member of staff should liase
with the Internal Examiner of the module, if appropriate, and with the
Programme Tutor where necessary. A report shall then be forwarded to the Head
of Department who will then inform the University authorities which will deal
with the issue through the Academic Misconduct Procedures. The University
Procedures for dealing with plagiarism are outlined in section 11 of the 2002 -
2003 Student Handbook under Academic
Misconduct.
Plagiarism
includes not properly referencing previously published material. The University has provided two tutorial
websites based on The Harvard
System or The Numeric
System to demonstrate correct referencing procedures. All students should familiarise themselves
with these websites.
Submitted work MAY be examined using the new
University Plagiarism Detection Service.
3.3
Departmental procedure for Coursework collection and return
3.3.1 Departmental Coursework Collection
This is the
procedure to be adopted for the collection of coursework by the departmental
representative. Any members of staff who collect coursework themselves during a
formal teaching session should undertake the same procedures in (2) – (7)
below.
Electronic
Submission
In cases where
members of staff may wish to receive coursework through electronic submissions,
it is still necessary to provide the students with a receipt to confirm that
the submission has been received. A web
page is available to set up, through which students can submit, that
automatically generates an electronic receipt with the submission time and date
given, the name of the file attached and the size of the file. Submission is not allowed, and error messages
are given to students if they either forget to attach their file or it is an
empty file. Please see the Quality
Co-ordinator for further details.
3.3.2 Late Submission of Coursework: Undergraduate (UG) and
Postgraduate programmes (PG)
1. All late work is submitted to Caroline Neale and a ‘Late Submission’ form completed.
2. The student will be advised to submit a CIP if he/she
considers there is reason for a valid claim.
CIP form and
guidance notes
3. Work submitted up to 24 hours late without a CIP or
with an invalid CIP will be capped at 40% for Undergraduate programmes (UG) and
50% for Postgraduate programmes (PG).
4. Work submitted after 24 hours late without a CIP or
with an invalid CIP will be marked at 0%.
5. Late work submitted with a valid CIP will be assessed
on available evidence (as considered by CIP panel).
6. Staff must not accept late coursework - students must
be directed to Caroline Neale.
The process is summarised
below
|
|
|
|
Coursework submitted to Caroline Neale and late submission form completed |
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CIP submitted |
|
|
No CIP |
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
valid CIP |
|
invalid CIP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Assess evidence of impairment and accept or
increase mark |
|
|
|
Less than 24 hrs late: Mark capped at 40% (UG) or 50% (PG) |
|
More than 24 hours late: Mark set at 0% |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
3.3.3 Coursework
Return
Coursework must
not be returned by leaving it outside the office for students to collect or by
placing the work in the student mail boxes. The following procedure should be
followed for returning marked coursework.
The member of
staff responsible for setting the coursework will be responsible for handing
back the work to the students preferably within a formal teaching session
during the week indicated in the module teaching schedule and coursework brief
for returning marked work. They shall maintain a reliable record
of the coursework returned, which is defensible to External Subject reviewers. For example, obtaining the student’s signature by the side of their
name on the same or similar list as the one used for collecting coursework.
This is confirmation of returned work and should be retained in a safe
place ready to forward to the Departmental Executive Officer within one week
of the date of return to the students.
Students who are
not present at that teaching session will be responsible for collecting the
coursework from the lecturer by arrangement. Lecturers should not give back any
work without obtaining the students’ signature or other confirmation of
coursework returned.
All staff involved
in assessing coursework must be able to demonstrate that feedback has taken
place.
3.3.4 Postgraduate
Programme Requirements
The following
notes are intended as an additional guide to both full-time and part-time
postgraduate students, particularly for block-taught modules.
Postgraduate
students submitting coursework by POST must use recorded delivery. It should be
addressed to the relevant postgraduate programme administrator, and the latest
acceptable postmark date is defined as the day of the coursework submission
deadline. The administrator will sign and post back the yellow coursework
confirmation slip as record of receipt.
Internal examiners
will aim to ensure that all postgraduate coursework is assessed within the
timescale of 3 weeks, and that thereafter the scripts and grades will be
available to students. The scripts will be returned at the next available
opportunity, and for which a student’s signature must be obtained.
3.4 Code of Practice for Group Coursework and Peer
Review
A recurring problem each year centres on a member or
members of a group who do not properly contribute to a group coursework
item. Consequently any group work
must have an individual component included and/or a peer assessment component.
It is a
requirement that whenever an Internal Examiner is considering setting a
piece of group coursework for a particular module the following guidelines are
taken into account:
a) Requiring each member of each group to indicate the
percentage of effort they made to the group’s output.
b) Requiring each member of each group to indicate
exactly what contribution they made to the group’s output.
c) Use the Web-PA system flexible on-line tool at: http://web-pa.lboro.ac.uk/ . This tool has been designed to encourage
student participation and reduce assessment workload, whilst allowing
assessment criteria to remain “assignment specific” for students
to peer assess each other’s performance. This would cover both options (a) and
(b) directly.
d) Conducting a viva examination of selected individuals
{usually based on concerns raised by either (a), (b) or (c)}.
e) Conducting a group viva examination.
f)
Asking the group
to make a presentation of their results.
g) As part of the assessment requiring the group to
produce a diary of their meetings and indicating the contribution made by each
individual member.
h) As part of the assessment requiring each individual
to produce a short reflective piece about the assignment.
With students being aware of this approach, it may
hopefully discourage members from not contributing fairly. Groups should inform the staff member setting
the coursework as soon as possible if workload problems arise for which this no
resolution achievable within the group.
Staff can then reinforce to all members how the peer assessment
procedure will work and what the likely effect this will have on the grades
given to individual members.
Return to QA Contents list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering
home page
4.1 Module review
The Module Review must be carried out by the
Internal Examiner together with an independent Moderator. At least two
students who were taught on the module are required to provide feedback. These
students should be representative of all the students in the group. Where
students from different backgrounds or different programmes are taught on a
module it may be necessary to review the module with more than two students.
The review should take place as soon as
possible after the completion and marking of all assessment related to the
module. At the Module Review Meeting the module is discussed and
recommendations for improvements agreed. (If agreement on all actions is not
reached this should be made clear on the report form together with how the
matter is to be resolved.)
It is the responsibility of the Internal
Examiner to arrange the Module Review Meeting and find another member of the
departmental staff to act as moderator. The Moderator should act as
Chairperson.
During the meeting the moderator should ask
the students for their views on each item listed on the form. These views will
then be discussed and where appropriate a course of
action agreed.
A Module Review Form must be completed and signed by the staff and students attending the meeting. Blank copies of the Module Review Form may be downloaded.
To assist the discussions the meeting should
have available the following documents:
Actions initiated by the module review:
The Internal Examiner for the module is
responsible for initiating and completing the improvements to the module.
Evidence of these improvements should be retained by the IE.
Following the Module Review, a copy of the
completed Module Review Form Action list should be passed to the Programme
Tutor to enable any actions to be included in the Annual Programme Review
Report.
The original of the completed Module Review Form must be passed immediately to the Departmental Executive Officer who will file the document and retain it for three years. The Internal Examiner should retain a copy for their own records.
The new HEFCE QA auditing procedure will require us to provide substantial evidence of this. Please make sure this is carried out and documented for future reference
NOTE: Where all the module teaching is
bought-in, it is STILL the responsibility of the named IE to ensure surveys and
reviews are undertaken.
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
The programme review process is detailed in
Section 3.5 of University
Academic Quality Procedures.
A list of the guidance documents and
templates can be found here.
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
1 The Departmental Code of
Practice for Staff Student Committees (SSC) follows the University's QA
procedures. The Department however will not have a separate SSC for each
undergraduate programme but will be formed as outlined in 6.2.
2 A Staff Student
Committee shall be formed for each of the following groups of programmes within
the Department, (i) B.Eng. and M.Eng.
Civil, Building Engineering Services, (ii) All Construction programmes plus
Commercial Management and Quantity Surveying and (iii) all Transport
programmes. Representation on the SSC's will be one
student per year per programme and the relevant Programme Tutors. A separate
SSC shall be formed for research students within the Department.
3 There will be two
meetings for each group and then a final combined meeting encompassing all
groups will be held.
4 There will be one SSC
for all postgraduate taught programmes which will also hold three
meetings during the year.
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
The Quality Co-ordinator may decide to bring
to the Head of Department's attention important issues relating to the teaching
and learning within the department. This is achieved with a Quality Audit
Action Sheet that records the problem and suggests the action required.
This is an example of a Quality Audit Action
Sheet:
QUALITY
AUDIT ACTION SHEET : NUMBER 9.../.............. Date .................
|
|
Name |
Date |
|
1. Problem |
|
|
|
2 .Evidence |
|
|
|
3. Possible Action |
|
|
|
4 .Details passed to
Head of Department |
|
|
|
5 .Approved Action |
|
|
|
6 .Responsibility |
|
|
|
7. Date for completion |
|
|
|
8 .Action completed |
|
|
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
Module specifications should be reviewed
annually by the Internal Examiner and amended in accordance with the procedures
detailed in the University's
Academic Quality Procedures. (Section 3.1 Programmes of Study). Details are also given on the approval
process following amendments, see Section 3.1, points (viii) – (xi).
The Departmental Executive Officer will
advise on the current procedures for initiating new modules. Documentation will
be circulated at the appropriate point in the academic year for collating
amendments to existing modules.
If you consider that you HAVE to make a
change to a current module please contact the Departmental Executive Officer
All changes for next academic year will be
entered on the module database by the Departmental Executive Officer.
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
The University has a pastoral care system of
which it is justifiably proud. The Department of Civil and Building Engineering
operates a centralised tutoring system for students. There is a Senior Tutor,
currently Mr R H Mayo, who supervises a web-based Tutorial Record System produced by the
Engineering Faculty Teaching and Learning Support Centre.
Each student in the Department is allocated
a Personal Tutor on joining the Department and, where possible, keeps the same Personal
Tutor throughout their stay. In the final year of your programme however, your
project supervisor will become your Personal Tutor. Each semester the Departmental Executive
officer will identify a 1 hour slot on all students
timetables for Personal Tutor-Tutee meetings. It should also be made clear to
students that, if needed, further meetings can be arranged at any time and that
contact can easily be made with you through email. As the front line of student
care and guidance within the Department, it is incumbent on Personal Tutors to
get to know their tutees as well and as quickly as possible, at the least being
able to recognise them in the corridor. If a sufficient relationship is built
up, students will feel able to bring any problem, personal or academic, to
their tutor.
Tutors log the results of tutorials on the
Co-Tutor System. These need not be formal meetings, but can include
"casual chats" where the relationship is developing. The entries
should indicate the areas covered in the meeting and highlight any points for
concern or action. It is very important that Co-Tutor records are maintained,
since they are open for all tutors to see. If any colleague has doubts about a
particular student, reference can be made to Co-Tutor - it is not helpful if
nothing is there! These records will in due course also enable references to be
written after the students have graduated, since all Co-Tutor records are
archived and can be retrieved by a master tutor. The TRS also enables tutors to
log "hidden comments" of a more confidential nature available only to
the Personal Tutor or Senior Tutor. Student comments relating to the programme
can be added from a pull-down menu, as can tutor responses. Individual students
may see their records on the Co-Tutor system at any time, in accordance with
the Data Protection Act.
As currently constituted, the communication
modules in semester 1 of Part A enable all Personal Tutors to meet their
tutees, since these modules are taken by all undergraduate students and include
CVs, oral presentations and in some cases site visits, all done in conjunction
with personal tutors. The personal contact associated with these activities can
be logged on Co-Tutor. For Part B, C and D students, Personal Tutors should
make contact with their Tutees, either through a formal meeting or email, at
least twice per term.
If a Personal Tutor feels that they require
advice or back up, reference can be made to the Senior Tutor, Departmental
Executive Officer, Head of Department, or directly to any of the University's
professional welfare staff including:- Counselling,
Disability and Additional Needs, Hardship Fund, Student Accommodation Services,
Careers Service, Student Advice Centre, English Language Study Unit,
Mathematics Learning Support Centre or the Medical Centre. The Student Advice
Centre is run by the Students' Union and includes, amongst others, specialists
in the problems of overseas students. It is the responsibility of the Personal
Tutor to formally advise the Senior Tutor of any student having serious
difficulties of any nature. These may then be dealt with at Programme Tutor
level and by the Head of the Department if required.
The Co-Tutor system includes the e-mail
address of each student in the Department, making contact by this means easy.
When students leave the University their record cannot be erased, but instead
is archived.
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
Double checking of ALL examination scripts
should be undertaken internally by all groups before submission to the
Departmental Executive Officer. This should be in the form of a second reader
assessment using the Examination Paper Second Reader Sheets. Copies of a Second
Reader Sheet are available from the DEO or here.
1. The responsibility for presenting a complete
and correct examination paper for a module rests with the Internal
Examiner. IE
2. For each examination a Second Reader (SC)
must check the paper and complete an Examination Paper Second
Reader Sheet). These should be returned to the IE with any errors /
comments marked on the examination paper and discussed if necessary. SC/IE
4. The IE
should submit the Second Reader Sheet with the examination paper to the DEO. In
the event that the external examiner makes comments on the paper requiring
action by the IE, then the DEO will return the Examination Second Reader
Sheet's to the IE together with the external examiners report form for action
and resubmission. IE/DEO
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
Double marking of examination scripts will
be undertaken by selective sampling. This procedure will apply to ALL examination
scripts.
1. The responsibility for presenting a valid set of marks for a
module rests with the Internal Examiner.
IE
2. The Internal Examiner should identify appropriate scripts for
double marking based on the following criteria: IE
3. These scripts should be identified by marking
them in some way, for instance by a star in red pen. They should then be passed
to the second marker with an Examination
Marking Sheet. Copies are also available from the DEO. IE
4. Upon checking the marks, the second marker
(SM) should either sign the marks off by initialling them or arrange for a
third opinion if there is a disagreement.
SM
5. The average examination mark should be
calculated for the module and where appropriate the Programme Tutor consulted
and action agreed if necessary. IE/PT
6. The IE should retain a copy of the
Examination Marking Sheet and forward the original to the Departmental
Executive Officer at the same time that the Module Marks are presented to the
Systems Manager or the Departmental Executive Officer (As per section 12.0 part
6). IE/DEO
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
This code of practice covers the processing
of marks for both undergraduate and postgraduate modules. It includes details
of the procedures to accommodate claims for impaired performance, the
publication of the grades and the responsibilities of the programme board and
Head of Department. This code is described in Appendix
9 of the University's Academic Quality Procedures. Listed below are
additional Departmental requirements to this code. Staff should also
familiarise themselves with the University's Code of
Practice on Undergraduate Reassessment. Further guidance for Postgraduate
Programme requirements for Module Boards is available in Section 3.5 of the University's
Academic Quality Procedures.
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
Examination
feedback may be given to students who have under-performed in order to help
them focus their efforts on weak areas of performance
Where
a student or number of students approach a lecturer with a view to obtaining
feedback on examination performance the lecturer should follow the guidelines
given below.
Return to QA Contents
list
Return to Civil and Building Engineering home page
Civil and Building Engineering,
last updated 27 April, 2005