13.07.2015 Views

HND Business - University of Wolverhampton

HND Business - University of Wolverhampton

HND Business - University of Wolverhampton

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

UNIVERSITY QUALITY COMMITTEEBUSINESS AND LAW STANDING PANEL 2002 / 2003Recommendation to <strong>University</strong> Quality Committee (Reference 1186)The Standing Panel was asked to Validate the<strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong>Confirmedin the <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Wolverhampton</strong> <strong>Business</strong> School (UWBS) and is pleased to recommend to <strong>University</strong>Quality Committee approval <strong>of</strong> the following proposals:VALIDATIONPathways:<strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong>DELETIONSPathways:Franchise link with:Stafford College for <strong>HND</strong>/C <strong>Business</strong> and FinanceTelford College <strong>of</strong> Arts and Technology for <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong> and Finance(The deletion process is closed out)DATE OF THE NEXT REVIEWThe next review <strong>of</strong> <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong> is scheduled to take place by the end <strong>of</strong> the 2008 - 2009 academic year.In support <strong>of</strong> these recommendations, the Standing Panel provides the following reports <strong>of</strong> its considerations:− The Academic Approval Record (AAR), which provides an evaluative summary <strong>of</strong> significant issues andoutcomes− The Standing Panel Record (SPR), which provides a detailed account <strong>of</strong> the process undertaken andevidence to support the statements made in the AAR.The Standing Panel is aware that the <strong>University</strong> Quality Committee reserves the right to review all decisionsmade by the Standing Panel, to ratify approvals and to follow up on any issues identified in the AAR as theCommittee sees fit.<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 1 <strong>of</strong> 19


Academic Approval Record4. Pr<strong>of</strong>essional, Statutory, Regulatory Body InvolvementWas a pr<strong>of</strong>essional or other external body involved in the process?YesDescribe the nature <strong>of</strong> any involvement, including any details about accreditation orrecognition.The design <strong>of</strong> the award is based on the Edexcel document "BTEC Higher Nationals <strong>Business</strong> -Guidance and Units".The Award has been validated under the <strong>University</strong>'s Licence with Edexcel.5. Programme Aims and OutcomesAre the programme aims clearly laid out?YesAre the programme outcomes clearly described?YesDo the learning outcomes relate to the programme aims and outcomes? YesWere any significant concerns about the programme aims and outcomes Noraised by the Panel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about programme aims and outcomes, includingany examples <strong>of</strong> good practice.The programme aims follow the Edexcel Guidelines for <strong>Business</strong>, which are:To provide an educational foundation for a range <strong>of</strong> administrative and management careers inbusinessTo provide flexibility, knowledge and skills as a basis for future studies and career developmentTo develop students' ability in business through effective use and combination <strong>of</strong> the knowledgeand skills gained in different parts <strong>of</strong> the programmeTo develop a range <strong>of</strong> skills and techniques, and attitudes essential for successful performance inworking lifeTo provide a progression route to top-up degrees in <strong>Business</strong>.The Guidelines articulate the School's philosophy on HN programmes.In addition, the programme has been designed to address the School and the <strong>University</strong>'s wideningparticipation agenda.6. Curriculum Design, Content and OrganisationAre the curriculum design, organisation and content <strong>of</strong> the provisionsatisfactory?Is the provision in line with the national subject benchmark?YesIs the provision in line with the Framework for Higher EducationQualifications (FHEQ)?Were any significant concerns about the curriculum design, organisationand content <strong>of</strong> the provision, subject or qualification benchmarks raisedby the Panel or the External Advisor?YesYes<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 3 <strong>of</strong> 19


Academic Approval RecordIf yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.• Standing Panel queried the inclusion <strong>of</strong> two 15-credit module delivered over two semesters.This did not accord with the technical requirements <strong>of</strong> the <strong>University</strong>'s modular framework.After discussion with the award team, it has been agreed that in year 1, the QuantitativeTechniques module will run yearlong alongside the Personal Development Spine. This module hasbeen chosen as students, on the whole, find the numerical aspects <strong>of</strong> the programme difficult, andthis will give students longer more time to assimilate statistical knowledge and techniques.In Year 2, the <strong>Business</strong> Strategy module will run yearlong alongside the Personal Developmentspine module. This will enable students to develop their strategic thinking over a longer period <strong>of</strong>time.• Standing Panel queried the rationale for the modules chosen and noted that the provisionappeared to be overburdened with core modules. It was suggested that more options might beintroduced to reduce the prescribed content.The programme is prescribed, with the exception <strong>of</strong> one option in year 2, in order to achieve theprogramme aims and to satisfy the Edexcel guidelines. The two personal development spinemodules have been designed to give extra support to the students throughout the programme.Standing Panel accepted the Proposer's arguments.If desired, please add any further comments about the curriculum design, organisation andcontent <strong>of</strong> the provision, subject or qualification benchmarks, including any examples <strong>of</strong>good practice.Standing Panel commended the initiative in making "personal development" a credit-bearingmodule.If a periodic review has been undertaken, is there evidence <strong>of</strong> curriculumrenewal?YesThe <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong> and Finance was part <strong>of</strong> the overall review in 2001/2002.The redesign and revalidation <strong>of</strong> this award was postponed until 2002/2003and has been influenced by issues raised in the Review. The programmeconsists largely <strong>of</strong> new modules specifically designed for this award, but fourappropriate existing modules have been used. All the new core modules willonly be available to <strong>HND</strong> students on this programme, and all modules, withthe exception <strong>of</strong> the option in the second year will be taught in separateiterations specifically for <strong>HND</strong> students.Were any significant concerns about the curriculum renewal raised by Nothe Panel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about curriculum renewal, including anyexamples <strong>of</strong> good practice.The External Advisor confirmed that the programme met the Edexcel requirements for the<strong>Business</strong> title and that the programme content was appropriate and up-to-date.7. Teaching, Learning and AssessmentAre the teaching and learning activities appropriate to the programmeaims and outcomes?Were any significant concerns about the teaching, learning andassessment activities raised by the Panel or the External Advisor?YesYes<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 4 <strong>of</strong> 19


Academic Approval RecordIf yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.AssessmentStanding Panel queried a) the justification for students taking just one unseen exam in the two yearprogramme, b) whether the listed assessment tasks were appropriate to support the learningoutcomes, and c) the number times each outcome is assessed. The Panel suggested that this shouldbe discussed in the School and a statement on the matter included in the responses to StandingPanel. See 13(a) below.The Standing Panel noted that (b) was prompted because not all the MSTs had explained therationale for the module’s assessment tasks and thus the link between learning outcomes andindividual assignments was not explicit, though it was recognised that the links were implicit.In the light <strong>of</strong> the discussion <strong>of</strong> the assessment strategy, it was agreed that:• Revision <strong>of</strong> the MSTs, to ensure that all templates specify the links between assessment tasksand the associated learning outcomes.• the assessment strategy should be revisited to include more unseen exams to provide studentswith more practice in examination technique.• clarification on the whether assessments were components or elements should be included inall the relevant documentation.• the assessment regime is revisited in order to ensure consistency across all modules in terms <strong>of</strong>the tariff weightings set out in the submission document.• Clarification on how the assessment for group work is implemented, in particular how gradesare allocated for group and individual performances.• further information is included in all the relevant documentation on how formative assessmentwill be used and on how feedback on assignments will be given to students.• consideration is given to including more presentations as this form <strong>of</strong> assessment tests animportant key skill.Learning and TeachingBoth the Proposer and the Panel recognised that there are overlaps between key skills, subjectspecific skills and intellectual skills. However, it would help students (and staff teaching on theprogramme) if there were a fuller articulation <strong>of</strong> the differences between the various categories <strong>of</strong>skills.Standing Panel recommended that a mapping exercise is undertaken to demonstrate whereknowledge understanding and skills are developed and/or assessedSee Appendix 5 for Chair's confirmation that all actions have been closed out.If desired, please add any further comments about teaching, learning and assessmentactivities, including any examples <strong>of</strong> good practice.The Panel was satisfied that the Learning and Teaching strategies set out in the documentationwere appropriate for the types <strong>of</strong> students at which the programme is aimed. The Panel noted thatthe modules are in different stages <strong>of</strong> development in the use <strong>of</strong> TSL; there is, though, an intentionthat learning materials will be made available on WOLF at the earliest opportunity.Is the assessment design and practice satisfactory?Were any significant concerns about the assessment design and practiceraised by the Panel or the External Advisor?YesYes<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 5 <strong>of</strong> 19


Academic Approval RecordIf yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about the assessment design and practice,including any examples <strong>of</strong> good practice.Do the teaching, learning and assessment methods allow the student tomake an effective contribution?Were any significant concerns about the methods <strong>of</strong> teaching, learningand assessment preventing student contribution raised by the Panel orthe External Advisor?YesNoIf yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about the methods <strong>of</strong> teaching, learning andassessment in relation to effective student contribution, including any examples <strong>of</strong> goodpractice.8. Student Progression and AchievementIs the entry qualifications pr<strong>of</strong>ile appropriate?YesWere any significant concerns about entry qualifications raised by the YesPanel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.Standing Panel queried the entry requirement <strong>of</strong> IB 24 points and the omission <strong>of</strong> any reference toGCSE requirements. It was noted that a QAA-recognised Access to HE Certificate was a‘standard’ entry qualification.• J Gollins to re-consider the entry requirements and include any revisions in the ‘structurepaper’ to be submitted to the Chair.The entry requirements have been revised. See Appendix 4If desired, please add any further comments about entry qualifications, including anyexamples <strong>of</strong> good practice.Are the rates and trends in student progression and completionsatisfactory?Were any significant concerns about the rates and trends in studentprogression and completion raised by the Panel or the External Advisor?YesNoIf yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about rates and trends in student progressionand completion, including any examples <strong>of</strong> good practice..Last year’s review <strong>of</strong> the programme had explored student performance. The Panel noted that thecurrent proposals addressed the issues identified in the review.Do the qualifications awarded indicate an appropriate level <strong>of</strong> student Yesachievement?Were any significant concerns about qualifications awarded or the level No<strong>of</strong> student achievement raised by the Panel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 6 <strong>of</strong> 19


Academic Approval RecordIf desired, please add any further comments about qualifications awarded or the level <strong>of</strong>student achievement, including any examples <strong>of</strong> good practice.9. Student Support and GuidanceAre the arrangements for admission and student induction satisfactory? YesWere any significant concerns about admission and student induction Noraised by the Panel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about admission and student induction,including any examples <strong>of</strong> good practice.Are the arrangements for student support and guidance satisfactory? YesWere any significant concerns about student support and guidance raised Noby the Panel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about student support and guidance, includingany examples <strong>of</strong> good practice.Standing Panel noted that UWBS has established an appropriate student guidance system tosupport the non-traditional HE learner.The appropriateness <strong>of</strong> the student support and guidance system is regularly considered by SQC.10. Learning ResourcesIs the overall strategy for learning resources satisfactory, i.e. access to YesLearning Centres, learning materials, teaching accommodation, specialistequipment and technology?Were any significant concerns about learning resources raised by the NoPanel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about learning resources, including anyexamples <strong>of</strong> good practice.Materials in support <strong>of</strong> the programme will be accessible on WOLF in the near future.Standing Panel was satisfied that adequate Learning Centre and IT resources were available.<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 7 <strong>of</strong> 19


Academic Approval Record11. Quality Management and EnhancementAre satisfactory arrangements in place for monitoring and evaluating the Yesprogramme?Were any significant concerns about monitoring and evaluation Noarrangements raised by the Panel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about monitoring and evaluation arrangements,including any examples <strong>of</strong> good practice.The School's procedures are well established and effective.Is there evidence <strong>of</strong> the role played by External Examiners in curriculum Yesdevelopment and quality enhancement?Were any significant concerns about External Examiners raised by the NoPanel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about External Examiners, including anyexamples <strong>of</strong> good practice.External Examiners' views are evaluated and, if appropriate, adopted by the Award Team as part <strong>of</strong>the School's annual monitoring processes.Is there evidence <strong>of</strong> the role played by student feedback in curriculum Yesdevelopment and quality enhancement?Were any significant concerns about student feedback raised by the NoPanel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about student feedback, including any examples<strong>of</strong> good practice.The School collects student feedback in a variety <strong>of</strong> formal and informal ways: for example,through MEQs, staff-student liaison groups, personal tutorials.Is there evidence <strong>of</strong> the role played by staff development and teaching Yesobservation in curriculum development and quality enhancement?Were any significant concerns about staff development and teaching Noobservation raised by the Panel or the External Advisor?If yes, please describe below the concerns, the action taken and the final outcome.If desired, please add any further comments about teaching observation, including anyexamples <strong>of</strong> good practice.The School's annual staff development programmes responds to identified staff needs on, forexample TSL.<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 8 <strong>of</strong> 19


Academic Approval Record12. Identification <strong>of</strong> issues that have institutional implicationsAre there any issues, which have institutional implications?YesIf yes, please list these below:The External Adviser noted that the MSTs do not provide an opportunity for proposers to specifythe allocation <strong>of</strong> time to class contact and other learning activities.13. Action checklistAre there any issues the Panel feels should be considered further,developed or monitoring?YesSee 13(a)If yes, please list these below, allocating for each issue the person or body responsible forclosing out the issue, the date by which it must be done and the mechanism for closure.13 (a) Responses to Standing Panel's comments and recommendationsAction Required By Whom By When To be closed out byto revisit the design and structure <strong>of</strong> the Award 31 July SP Sub group Chairprogramme.Leader 2003to re-consider the entry requirements and Award 31 July SP Sub group Chairinclude revisions in a ‘structure paper’ Leader 2003to revise the MSTs to ensure that all templates Award 31 July SP Sub group Chairspecify the links between assessment tasks Leader 2003and the associated learning outcomes.to include more unseen exams to providestudents with more practice in examinationtechnique.to clarify whether assessments arecomponents or elements and include in all therelevant documentation.to ensure consistency across all modules interms <strong>of</strong> the tariff weightings set out in thesubmission document.to clarify how the assessment for group workis implemented, in particular how grades areallocated for group and individualperformances.provide further information in all the relevantdocumentation on how formative assessmentwill be used and on how feedback onassignments will be given to students.AwardLeaderAwardLeaderAwardLeaderAwardLeaderAwardLeader31 July200331 July200331 July200331 July200331 July2003SP Sub group ChairSP Sub group ChairSP Sub group ChairSP Sub group ChairSP Sub group Chairthat consideration be given to including morepresentations as this form <strong>of</strong> assessment testsan important key skill.AwardLeader31 July2003SP Sub group Chair13(b) Actions for ongoing monitoring: NoneSigned (Standing Panel Chair) .........................................................………… Date .................................<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 9 <strong>of</strong> 19


Standing Panel RecordDetails <strong>of</strong> Panel and ParticipantsStanding Panel RecordBUSINESS AND LAW STANDING PANEL 2001 – 2002 and 2002 - 2003Standing Panel: <strong>Business</strong> and LawAcademic Year: 2002 - 2003 Chair: Seth Cr<strong>of</strong>ts Officer: Chris RavenStanding Panel members designated to validate the provision:Harvey Woolf(Chair <strong>of</strong> Standing Panel Sub group)Martin CartwrightSLSJoan WhieldonSLSJo ColesSLSDavid ClareLearning ResourcesIndependent External Adviser for the Re-validation:Mr Christopher Parry, Course Director for <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong> Studies and top-up degree. The <strong>Business</strong> School,<strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> Wales Institute, Cardiff.Details <strong>of</strong> Process UndertakenSummary <strong>of</strong> process:11/10/02 Standing Panel meeting to plan schedule for the validation <strong>of</strong> <strong>HND</strong>11/02/03 UWBS CD Sub committee considered Validation Submission document11/03/03 Documentation sent to External Advisor28/03/03 Standing Panel meeting with Key Proposer, External Advisor present. Appendix 225/07/03 Revised documentation sent to Harvey Woolf and approvedDocumentation:- Validation Submission Document- Programme Specification and Template and Module Specification Templates- Draft Pathway Guide for <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong>Adequacy <strong>of</strong> Documentation:All the documentation received has been to a very high standardAttachments:Appendix 1:Appendix 2:Appendix 3:Appendix 4:Appendix 5:Module detailsNotes from the Standing Panel meeting with External Advisor and Key ProposerSummary evaluation by External AdvisorRevised structure and actions closed out by Key Proposer and <strong>HND</strong> TeamComment by Harvey WoolfAppendix 1<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 10 <strong>of</strong> 19


Standing Panel Record<strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong>List <strong>of</strong> ModulesTitle Code Credit StatusMarketing MK1007 15 CoreOrganisations, Competition and Environment EC1008 15 CoreLegal and Regulatory Framework LW1032 15 CoreOrganisations and Behaviour HR1005 15 CorePrinciples <strong>of</strong> International <strong>Business</strong>* BE1002 15 CorePersonal Development Spine – level 1 BE1008 15 CoreQuantitative Techniques for <strong>Business</strong> BE1010 15 CoreProject Initiation* TC1001 15 CoreManaging Activities BE1009 15 CoreMarket Intelligence MK1006 15 CoreManaging Financial Resources AC2020 15 CoreManaging Information Systems IM2009 15 CorePersonal Development Spine level 2 BE2018 15 Core<strong>Business</strong> Strategy* BE2017 15 CoreService Sector Marketing* MK2010 15 Core OptionEnvironment Management EC2015 15 Core OptionIndependent Learning In the Workplace IM2007 15 Core Option* Existing modules<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 11 <strong>of</strong> 19


Standing Panel Record<strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Wolverhampton</strong> Appendix 2<strong>University</strong> Quality Committee<strong>Business</strong> and Law Standing PanelNotes <strong>of</strong> the meeting <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Business</strong> and Law Standing Panel Sub group held on Friday 28 th March 2003, atPriorslee Hall, Shropshire Campus, TelfordThe meeting was held with the External Advisor present to consider the validation <strong>of</strong> <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong>Standing PanelMr Harvey Woolf (Standing Panel Deputy Chair)Mrs Chris Raven (Officer)Mr Martin CartwrightMs Jo ColesMs Joan WhieldonUWBS Proposing TeamMs Jill GollinsExternal Advisor – Mr Christopher ParryCourse Director for <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong> Studies andtop-up degree, The <strong>Business</strong> School, <strong>University</strong><strong>of</strong> Wales Institute, CardiffBackground Information to the revalidationKey issues from the Review <strong>of</strong> <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong> and Finance undertaken in 2001/2002 have informed the design<strong>of</strong> the proposed programme. Feedback from existing students has also influenced the programme, which hasbeen designed to incorporate clear progression routes to Honours degrees. Despite encouragement from theGovernment for the adoption <strong>of</strong> Foundation degrees, the School has identified a continuing demand fromstudents and employers for <strong>HND</strong> qualifications.The programme follows the recommendations <strong>of</strong> the Edexcel document BTEC Higher Nationals in <strong>Business</strong> -Guidance and Units. In addition, the QAA benchmark for <strong>Business</strong> and Management has been taken intoconsideration in the design <strong>of</strong> the programmes.Discussion <strong>of</strong> the new proposal considered the following areas:• Aims and Outcomes• Curriculum Design, Content and Organisation• Teaching, Learning and Assessment• Student Progression and Achievement• Student Support and Guidance• Learning Resources• Staffing Resources and Research base• Quality Management and Enhancement• Comments on Module Specification TemplatesAims and Outcomes and Curriculum Design, Content and OrganisationStanding Panel enquired why the revalidation exercise had not been used as an opportunity to revise or add tothe Edexcel outcomes for <strong>Business</strong>.ResponseThe decision to use the Edexcel outcomes was taken deliberately because they reflected the key elements <strong>of</strong><strong>Business</strong> education at this level and helped to make a clear distinction between QAA’s Intermediate andHonours qualifications. The External Advisor confirmed that the programme met the Edexcel requirements forthe <strong>Business</strong> title and that the programme content was appropriate and up-to-date.<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 12 <strong>of</strong> 19


Standing Panel RecordStanding Panel queried the rationale for the modules chosen and noted that the provision appeared to beoverburdened with core modules. It was suggested that more options be introduced to lessen the prescribedcontent.ResponseThe programme is prescribed, with the exception <strong>of</strong> one option in year 2, in order to achieve the programmeaims and to satisfy the Edexcel guidelines. The two personal development spine modules have been designed togive extra support to the students throughout the programme.Standing Panel commended as good practice the School's initiative in making ‘personal development’ a creditbearingmodule. However, concern was expressed that a) these modules were 15 credit modules delivered overtwo semesters which did not accord with the technical requirements <strong>of</strong> the <strong>University</strong>’s modular framework andb) the content <strong>of</strong> the Personal Development modules lacked sufficient intellectual and academic substance.Several suggestions were discussed by Standing Panel to resolve these matters. For example, at Level 1 themodule could be linked to "Quantitative Techniques" to develop a year long 30 credit module; and at Level 2the content could be expanded to cover business ethics or human resources. Alternatively, as the content <strong>of</strong> thelevel one module "Legal and Regulatory Framework" was considered to be extremely full, Standing Panelsuggested that it could run as a 15 credit 2 semester module to parallel the 15 credit 2 semester personaldevelopment module.Standing Panel suggested that a dedicated <strong>Business</strong> Ethics module would be a useful addition to the programmeand might be considered in future development.• J Gollins to revisit the design <strong>of</strong> the programme and forward a revised structure to Standing Panel by a dateto be agreed with the Chair outside the meeting.Standing Panel queried the inclusion <strong>of</strong> a work-based module, as many students may not be employed.ResponseStudents who do not have a job can select an alternative module with a practical content.Standing Panel was concerned that students who go on to enrol for the top-up degree programme are required toachieve 420 credits overall, 60 credits more than students on the degree route.ResponseThe number <strong>of</strong> credits stipulated by the Credit Consortia for an <strong>HND</strong> qualification is 240; therefore this cannotbe altered. The School had introduced four bridging modules (60 credits) to ensure that students are fully andappropriately prepared for work at Level 3.Standing Panel queried the entry requirement <strong>of</strong> IB 24 points and the omission <strong>of</strong> any reference to GCSErequirements. It was noted that a QAA-recognised Access to HE Certificate was a ‘standard’ entryqualification.• J Gollins to re-consider the entry requirements and include any revisions in the ‘structure paper’ to besubmitted to the Chair.Learning Teaching and AssessmentAssessmentStanding Panel queried a) the justification for students taking just one unseen exam in the two year programme,b) whether the listed assessment tasks were appropriate to support the learning outcomes, and c) the numbertimes each outcome is assessed. The Panel suggested that this should be discussed in the School and a statementon the Team's position should be one <strong>of</strong> the items included in the Award Leader's reposes to the StandingPanel's comments and recommendations.<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 13 <strong>of</strong> 19


Standing Panel RecordThe Standing Panel noted that (b) was prompted because not all the MSTs had explained the rationale for themodule’s assessment tasks and thus the link between learning outcomes and individual assignments was notexplicit, though it was recognised that the links were implicit.In the light <strong>of</strong> the discussion <strong>of</strong> the assessment strategy, it was agreed that:• Revision <strong>of</strong> the MSTs to ensure that all templates specify the links between assessment tasks and theassociated learning outcomes.• the assessment strategy should be revisited to include more unseen exams to provide students with morepractice in examination technique.• clarification on the whether assessments were components or elements should be included in all the relevantdocumentation.• the assessment regime is revisited in order to ensure consistency across all modules in terms <strong>of</strong> the tariffweightings set out in the submission document.• Clarification on how the assessment for group work is implemented, in particular how grades are allocatedfor group and individual performances.• further information is included in all the relevant documentation on how formative assessment will be usedand on how feedback on assignments will be given to students.• consideration is given to including more presentations as this form <strong>of</strong> assessment tests an important keyskill.Learning and TeachingBoth the Proposer and the Panel recognised that there are overlaps between key skills, subject specific skills andintellectual skills. However, it would help students (and staff teaching on the programme) if there were a fullerarticulation <strong>of</strong> the differences between the various categories <strong>of</strong> skills.Standing Panel recommended that a mapping exercise is undertaken to demonstrate where knowledgeunderstanding and skills are developed and/or assessedThe Panel was satisfied that the Learning and Teaching strategies set out in the documentation were appropriatefor the types <strong>of</strong> students at which the programme is aimed. The Panel noted that there modules are in differentstages <strong>of</strong> development in the use <strong>of</strong> TSL; there is, though, an intention that learning materials will be madeavailable on WOLF at the earliest opportunity.Student Progression and AchievementLast year’s review <strong>of</strong> the programme had explored student performance. The Panel noted that the currentproposals addressed the issues identified in the review.Progression from the <strong>HND</strong> had been considered as part <strong>of</strong> CDCO above.Student Support and GuidanceQuality Management and EnhancementThere were no issues <strong>of</strong> concern involved with these aspects <strong>of</strong> the programme. The School's AnnualMonitoring procedures were well conceived and well understood by the Proposer. External Examiners' viewsare considered as part <strong>of</strong> Annual Monitoring and recommendations are incorporated into the award asappropriate. The School has a number <strong>of</strong> mechanisms both formal and informal, for identifying students' views<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 14 <strong>of</strong> 19


Standing Panel Recordon the award. These methods include MEQs, staff-student liaison meetings and personal tutorials. Allresponses to student issues raised are reported back to students via notice boards and the messenger system.Student induction, academic counselling and guidance services were well documented. It was suggested that thenext version <strong>of</strong> the pathway guide should foreground the <strong>HND</strong> more than it is in the draft version. The Panelcommended the Team on the additional support to be provided through the personal development ‘spine’.The programme will be monitored through the standard pattern <strong>of</strong> annual monitoring. Feedback from studentsand External Examiners will inform any future modification to the programme.Learning ResourcesAs noted above, materials in support <strong>of</strong> the programme will be accessible on WOLF in the near future.Standing Panel was satisfied that adequate Learning Centre and IT resources were available.Staffing Resources and Research baseThere were no issues <strong>of</strong> concern involved with staffing resources. The development <strong>of</strong> learning and teaching ishigh on the School's agenda and has promoted the growth <strong>of</strong> a population <strong>of</strong> staff who are knowledgeable about,and champion for, improvements in the quality <strong>of</strong> student learning. Staff are involved with continuingpr<strong>of</strong>essional development through Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Body membership and the School's staff development andappraisal system.Module specification templatesIt was agreed that members would forward specific comments on the MSTs to J Gollins. The External Advisoragreed to send comments in writing to the Officer.SummaryThe External Advisor commented on the quality <strong>of</strong> the proposal and that the suggestions made during themeeting were intended to help the <strong>HND</strong> Team develop further the programme. Standing Panel was satisfied thatthe revised <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong> would make a valuable contribution to the <strong>Business</strong> School's undergraduate portfolioThe Panel agreed that the programme should be recommended for the validation following receipt <strong>of</strong> theSchool’s responses to the Panel’s recommendations and suggestions. In addition, some (minor) amendments tothe documentation need to be made to ensure consistency across the individual documents. The date for thesubmission <strong>of</strong> the responses is to be agreed with the Chair.Institutional issuesThe External Adviser noted that the MSTs do not provide an opportunity for proposers to specify the allocation<strong>of</strong> time to class contact and other learning activities.<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 15 <strong>of</strong> 19


Standing Panel RecordAppendix 3Module Aims Outcomes Content Style Content Amount Learning Activities Assessment Resources CommentLevel OneMarketing Good Good Clear /Precise OK Well laid out Good Dibb level 2? A well presented clearly thought out moduleOEC Good Good A little brief OK Good Weighting ? GoodQTB Not commented on as may be being merged with PDS 1Legal F Good Good Clear /Precise Too much Good Hand in ?? A level ??? Too much material. Sections 17/18?O & B Good Good Clear /Precise OK Good Weighting ? Good 18? Nice rounded moduleMan Act Good Good Clear /Precise OK Good 6-8 ??? Texts L 2 ?? 12?Market In Good Good Clear /Precise OK Good Weighting ? Good A good mod but I really think this is Level 2PDS 1 See Comments re QTB - I believe that combining the two modules and running long/thin would be beneficial to studentsPIB Good Good Too brief Difficult to tell Not available More definition GoodLevel TwoMFR Good Good Clear /Precise Fullish Good Good Good A mix <strong>of</strong> L1 & L2 which seems fine. OBE GoodMIS Good Good Clear /Precise OK Good See Comm Good Not really happy with 20% marks from G vivaBS Good Good Clear /Precise OK Good Good Good Would suggest best as a semester 4 moduleEM Good Good A little brief OK - but relevance? Good Good Adequate? Not really sure how this fits in to the <strong>HND</strong>PDS Good Good A little brief A little light ? Good Good GoodILWP Good Good Too brief Difficult to tell Not available Select 4 units?? Good A very good ideaSSM Good Good Too brief Difficult to tell Not available More defintion<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 16 <strong>of</strong> 19


Standing Panel RecordAppendix 4<strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong>Revised Structure as per recommendations from Standing Panel MeetingStructureAfter discussion with the award team, it has been agreed that in year 1, the Quantitative Techniques module willrun year-long alongside the Personal Development Spine. This module has been chosen as students, on thewhole, find the numerical aspects <strong>of</strong> the programme difficult, and this will give students longer elapsed time toassimilate the knowledge and techniques.In Year 2, the <strong>Business</strong> Strategy module will run year-long alongside the Personal development spine. This willenable students to develop their strategic thinking over a longer period <strong>of</strong> time.In making these changes, the award now has equal workload in both semesters in both years. The revisedstructure is below :Year 1Semester 1Semester 2Year 2Semester 1Semester 2Marketing (<strong>HND</strong>) – level 1 (CP)Organisations, Competition and Environment (<strong>HND</strong>) – level1 (TF)BE1002 Principles <strong>of</strong> International <strong>Business</strong> – level 1 (CP)Legal and Regulatory Framework (<strong>HND</strong>) – level 1 (CP)Organisations and Behaviour (<strong>HND</strong>) - level 1 (CP)TC1001 Project Initiation(<strong>HND</strong>) – level 1(TF)Managing Activities (<strong>HND</strong>) – level 1 (TF)Market Intelligence (<strong>HND</strong>) – level 1 (CP)Managing Financial Resources (<strong>HND</strong>) – level 2 (CP)Management Information Systems (<strong>HND</strong>) – level 2 (TF)2 <strong>of</strong> the following 3 modules:MK2010 Service Sector Marketing – level 2 (CP)Environmental Management - Level 2 (TF)IM2007 Independent Learning in the Workplace (CP)Personaldevelopmentspine – level 1(CP)Personaldevelopmentspine – level 2(TF)QuantitativeTechniquesfor <strong>Business</strong>(<strong>HND</strong>) – level1 (TF)<strong>Business</strong>Strategy(<strong>HND</strong>) – level2 (TF)The <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong> follows the Credit Consortium Guidelines <strong>of</strong> 240 credits – 150 credits at level 1, and 90 creditsat level 2. All modules above are 15 credits.Entry requirementsConcern was expressed at the meeting regarding the inclusion <strong>of</strong> the entry requirements <strong>of</strong> IB 24 points, and thelack <strong>of</strong> reference to GCSE requirements. The entry requirements have now been rewritten according to thestandard entry requirements in the <strong>University</strong> prospectus. Thus entry requirements are now:The entry requirements for the <strong>HND</strong> are in line with the <strong>University</strong> standard entry for <strong>HND</strong>. For <strong>HND</strong>,applicants will need to have 100 –160 points, including a minimum <strong>of</strong> 80 points from any <strong>of</strong> the following:• one or two 6 unit awards (A2/Advanced GCEs or VCEs)• one 12 unit (Double VCE)• two 3-unit awards (AS levels)• Access course.Students with equivalent qualifications will also be considered:- Scottish Highers CCCC, Irish LeavingCertificate (240 points at Higher Level), IB 24 points.<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 17 <strong>of</strong> 19


Standing Panel RecordStudents will normally be expected to have 5 GCSE passes, including a minimum <strong>of</strong> grade ‘C’ in Maths andEnglish.Applicants must be over 18 years old when they start the programme.The level <strong>of</strong> entry points for Irish leaving Certificate and IB have been checked with the current <strong>University</strong>prospectus.Links between assessment tasks and the associated learning outcomesMSTs have now been updated to show the links, with the exception <strong>of</strong> HR1005 Organisations and Behaviour, asthe module leader is currently unavailable.Clarification <strong>of</strong> components and elementsMSTs have now been updated to identify thisConsistency <strong>of</strong> assessment regime with tariff weightingsAll MSTs have now been checked and conform with thisAssessment <strong>of</strong> group workUWBS uses a variety <strong>of</strong> techniques to assess an individual’s contribution to the group. These include• Allowing the group to peer assess each member’s contribution. Normally this is on a document signedby the group. The grade is then apportioned across the group.• Asking group members to identify the contribution they made to the work, by identifying parts <strong>of</strong> thereport/presentation etc. the module tutor will then assess the individual’s grade.• In the case <strong>of</strong> a dispute interviewing the group to ascertain contribution.The norm will be that all members are given the same grade, but this decision is informed by the mechanismsabove, and grades adjusted where necessary.Formative assessment and feedbackUWBS has a policy <strong>of</strong> using formative assessment as an ongoing process throughout all modules – moduleleaders are currently preparing module details, and will be specifying where such assessment will be included.This could include short pieces <strong>of</strong> written work, evaluation <strong>of</strong> development <strong>of</strong> portfolio work, mockpresentations, mock tests etc. These assessments are <strong>of</strong>ten peer assessed, when feedback is normally given directto the student at the time. Any written work is returned to the student quickly, <strong>of</strong>ten being read and returned inthe student’s presence.UWBS is currently working on a standard feedback form for all assessment, which is graded, and this will beused next academic year. These forms will be returned to the students within the standard three-weekturnaround period. Students will be given the opportunity for further one-to-one feedback from the tutor.Use <strong>of</strong> further unseen examinationsThe use <strong>of</strong> unseen examinations is in line with UWBS current policy for assessment <strong>of</strong> <strong>HND</strong>; however, thispolicy is continually under review.Further use <strong>of</strong> presentations as assessmentPresentations are used extensively as formative assessment, and in class tutorials, therefore the skill will bedeveloped. Presentation is used in assessment for Organisations and Behaviour, and personal development spine1, and will be specifically developed in both spine modules, and business strategy.Jill Gollins16.07.03<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 18 <strong>of</strong> 19


Standing Panel Record<strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Wolverhampton</strong> Appendix 5<strong>Business</strong> and Law Standing PanelOutcome <strong>of</strong> Recommendations/Suggestions agreed by Standing PanelHW’s comments 22 July 20031. to revisit the design <strong>of</strong> the programme and forward a revised structure to Standing Panel by a date to beagreed with the Chair outside the meeting.Programme revised to allow for what is in effect a 30 credit ‘spine’ in each year. The spine runs acrossboth semesters <strong>of</strong> years 1 and 2 and comprises 2x 15 credit modules in each year. In Year 1 the modulesare Personal Development 1 and Quantitative Techniques for <strong>Business</strong> (<strong>HND</strong>). In Year 2, the modules arePersonal Development 2 and <strong>Business</strong> strategy. The programme is prescribed according to the Edexcelguidelines and, thus, includes only core and core options.2. to re-consider the entry requirements and include any revisions in the ‘structure paper’ to be submittedto the Chair.These have been revised appropriately3. to revise the MSTs to ensure that all templates specify the links between assessment tasks and theassociated learning outcomes.This has been completed with the following exceptions: HR1005, <strong>Business</strong> and Organisations (moduleleader not available)4. the assessment strategy should be revisited to include more unseen exams to provide students withmore practice in examination technique.The team has discussed this and have concluded that the assessment regime is consistent with the School’spolicy on the balance between seen/unseen exams.5. clarification on the whether assessments were components or elements should be included in all therelevant documentation.This has been done for all modules.6. the assessment regime is revisited in order to ensure consistency across all modules in terms <strong>of</strong> thetariff weightings set out in the submission document.This has been done.7. clarification on how the assessment for group work is implemented, in particular how grades areallocated for group and individual performances.The School’s approach to the assessment <strong>of</strong> group work has been clarified. Module leaders will work to theSchool’s policy.8. further information is included in all the relevant documentation on how formative assessment will beused and on how feedback on assignments will be given to students.A statement on the School’s approach to feedback has been supplied.9. consideration be given to including more presentations as this form <strong>of</strong> assessment tests an importantkey skill.The team has noted this and will continue to develop its strategy for presentations.In the light <strong>of</strong> the Team’s responses, I recommend that the <strong>HND</strong> <strong>Business</strong> should be approved, subject tothe caveat that UQC can amend the Panel’s decision. For the record, I would like to see the MST for thenew module noted in 3.Harvey Woolf22 July 2003<strong>Business</strong> & Law Standing Panel<strong>HND</strong> AAR 2003 Page 19 <strong>of</strong> 19

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!