Responsesassignment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Contents Introduction: Review structure and process 3 1. Management of the student learning experience 5 2. Management of quality and standards 17 3. Management of enhancement and promotion of good practice 23 Summary and recommendations 24 Appendices 28 2
Introduction: Review structure and process The Postgraduate Programme Review (PPR) of the School of Engineering is part of the University’s Quality Assurance procedures and is complemented by the Senatus and College Quality Assurance Committees’ monitoring and reporting, and by the External Examiner system. The PPR system is designed to look at the total postgraduate provision of a School, including all postgraduate taught programmes and research degrees, and the supporting managerial and administrative structures. However, as the administration and management of postgraduate taught provision is undertaken by the School of Engineering Teaching Organisation, this provision is scheduled to be reviewed under the University’s Teaching Programme Review mechanism (TPR). The next TPR for the School of Engineering is scheduled for the academic year 2012/13. This PPR was therefore concerned only with research degree provision and the operation of the Graduate School. The review covered the period January 2006 to January 2011. The School of Engineering was last reviewed under the (then) Quinquennial Review process in December 2005. The PPR consisted of: • The University’s standard remit for internal subject review • The subject specific remit for the review • The analytical report prepared by the Graduate School and additional material provided in advance to the review team (appendix 2) • The visit by the review team, including consideration of further material (appendix 2) • The PPR report produced by the review team • Following the review, action by the subject area and others to whom recommendations were remitted Membership of the Review Panel The Review Panel comprised: Dr G McDougall Chair, College Dean of Quality Assurance Professor T Mays External Assessor, University of Bath Professor A Vaughan External Assessor, University of Southampton Dr P Nienow Internal Member, School of GeoSciences Dr M Bailey Internal Member, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine Mr Eric Holmes Student Member, Business School Secretariat: Lynda Henderson (CSE Academic Affairs Officer) 3
Page 1 and 2: QAC: 25.10.12 H/02/28/02 The Univer
Page 3 and 4: elevant, and not discussed further
Page 5 and 6: to the Employability Strategy Group
Page 7 and 8: Action: The convener to discuss fur
Page 9 and 10: Action: Committee Secretary to invi
Page 11 and 12: our current policies and procedures
Page 13 and 14: QAC: 25.10.12 H/02/28/02 QAC 12/13
Page 15 and 16: Exam Board minutes; External examin
Page 17 and 18: Course Evaluations are needed for t
Page 21 and 22: The International Office ensure goo
Page 23 and 24: Task Group supersedes an earlier ac
Page 25: College of Science and Engineering
Page 29 and 30: 1. Management of the student learni
Page 31 and 32: The panel detected a certain level
Page 33 and 34: The Panel noted that the UK PhD res
Page 35 and 36: The Panel also recommends that furt
Page 37 and 38: The School also has a good record i
Page 39 and 40: for Women in Science). It was ackno
Page 41 and 42: 2. Management of quality and standa
Page 43 and 44: employment over a career in academi
Page 45 and 46: The Panel recommended that the Scho
Page 47 and 48: 3. Management of enhancement and sh
Page 49 and 50: Recommendations The panel makes the
Page 51 and 52: A more formal review procedure shou
Page 53 and 54: Appendix 2 Additional information c
Page 55 and 56: 1.1 The review area’s approach to
Page 57 and 58: Taught provision: including develop
Page 59 and 60: Taught provision: including learnin
Page 61 and 62: The University of Edinburgh Senate
Page 63 and 64: practice or discipline reference po
Page 65 and 66: Widening Participation programmes,
Page 67 and 68: http://www.docs.sasg.ed.ac.uk/Acade
Page 71 and 72: QAC: 25.10.12 H/02/28/02 QAC 12/13
Page 73 and 74: APPENDIX 1 Number of Students Subje
Page 75 and 76: QAC: 25.10.12 H/02/28/02 QAC 12/13
Page 77 and 78:
The Code of Practice for Supervisor
Page 79 and 80:
11 Higher education providers ensur
Page 81 and 82:
The University of Edinburgh: Guidel
Page 83 and 84:
The University of Edinburgh Senate
Page 85 and 86:
Senatus Quality Assurance Committee
Page 87 and 88:
The University of Edinburgh Senate
Page 89 and 90:
If you intend to give full answers
Page 91 and 92:
The above sentence could be disprop
Page 93 and 94:
Indicators of sound practice: Strat
Page 95 and 96:
18. Do you have any suggestions for
Page 97 and 98:
24. Do you have any suggestions for
Page 99 and 100:
QAC: 25.10.12 H/02/28/02 QAC 12/13
Page 101 and 102:
Date of meeting Business Author Com
Page 103:
12.10.12
show all

Responsesassignment

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?