09 February 2005 - Heriot-Watt University

(i) Postgraduate Research Programmes
(BSW)
The new Code had been reviewed by Professor B Wherrett, comparing the Code with the
University’s Postgraduate Research Student Code of Practice. Professor Wherrett confirmed that
the University’s Code was broadly compliant with the QAA’s Code and that the Research Student
Co-ordinator’s Group would be checking implementation across Schools.
(ii) Flexible and Distance Learning
This Code had been reviewed by Professor P John and the Working Group drafting the
University’s Code of Practice on Flexible, Distance and Distributed Learning as detailed in Item
3.
(PJ/KAP/
JF)
The Director of Quality Development confirmed that the Code should be applied to all research
students including students studying for the awards of EngD and DBA.
(iii) External Examining
The new Code had been reviewed by the Deputy Registrar to ensure that the University’s
Handbook on External Examining and the External Examiner Report templates remained
compliant. The Committee noted changes which had been made to the University’s Handbook for
External Examining and to the Report template which included the following:
• Responsibility of Heads of Schools for briefing Examiners
• Compliance with the Data Protection Act and the Freedom of Information Act
• Voting at Progression Boards
• Experience required by prospective External Examiners.
7.3 It was noted that the University’s modified Handbook on External Examining for Taught Courses
would be available in the near future on the web at
http://www.hw.ac.uk/quality/reference/ch7.htm.
(SS)
8. ENHANCEMENT-LED INSTUTIONAL REVIEW
8.1 Noted a briefing paper prepared by the Director of Quality Development of the QAA institutional
review of the University which would be taking place in 2005 on the following dates:
• 18 and 19 January – Part 1
• Week commencing 20 February – Part 2.
The paper, which had been prepared as a briefing for PME, describes the objectives of the review
process, the procedure of review, the University’s preparations for review and particular activities
and areas which will require consideration prior to the review.
8.2 Noted that the process would be managed by a Steering Group under the Chairmanship of the
Vice-Principal with the day to day management of the process being undertaken by the Director
of Quality Development.
9. EXTERNAL EXAMINER REPORTS NOT SUBMITTED
9.1 Noted that despite repeated reminders a small number of External Examiners had not
submitted reports for 2003-4 as detailed in QESC/05/7. Noted that Heads of Schools had been
asked to appoint replacement Examiners in cases where appointments had not expired.
10. STUDENT HANDBOOKS
10.1 The Academic Registrar advised that concerns had been expressed regarding inconsistencies and
inaccuracies which had been found in specific student handbooks. Noted that there was no
standard format or content for such handbooks and that this had led to differences in the contents
and the level of detail of handbooks produced individual Schools.
10.2 Agreed that Schools could be assisted in the production of consistent student handbooks through
the introduction of a template which would list the required contents and style of the handbooks.
Agreed further that a mechanism for the scrutiny of drafts of such handbooks should be
4