The University of Edinburgh. Teaching Programme Review 2014/15 Biological Sciences 10 and 11 March 2015

Transcription

1 The University of Edinburgh Teaching Programme Review 2014/15 Biological Sciences 10 and 11 March 2015 Report Summary This is a brief summary of the full report of the Review carried out in Biological Sciences. Internal Review is carried out by the University on a cyclical basis, and is aimed at assuring and enhancing the quality of its provision. A key focus of the process is the student experience. Reviews are based on three overarching themes: Management of the student learning experience Management of quality and standards Management of enhancement and promotion of good practice The standard University remit for reviews can be found at In addition, the review of Biological Sciences considered the following remit items: The University theme of Community The College remit item: to review the effectiveness of the School s approach to assessment, including volume and type of assessments. The subject specific remit items: o the suite of undergraduate and postgraduate taught programme provision. o Biological Sciences suite of courses and, particularly, how the undergraduate ones interface with those of Biomedical Sciences. o the need for more transparent stepwise development of graduate skills across programmes o the feasability and potential value for Biological Sciences of introducing industrial placements within or in parallel with our programmes. o issues relating to the immediate and longer term Biological Sciences estate. o technology-enhanced learning within Biological Sciences: the merits and opportunities. o Biological Sciences online provision and the long term merits and opportunities. Following endorsement by Senate Quality Assurance Committee, the full report of the review is available publicly at: Full information about the internal review process can be found at Conclusions Biological Sciences at Edinburgh consistently ranks in the top 20 to 30 in University World Rankings. Applicant numbers for both undergraduate and postgraduate programmes are strong and growing, students are attracted from around the world, and the School s graduates are highly employable. Within the University, Biological Sciences had the highest student satisfaction rating (94%) of all Schools in the 2014 National Student Survey. 1

2 The Review Team for the 2015 Teaching Programme Review found the School to have highly motivated teaching staff who are experts in their fields and dedicated to their teaching responsibilities. This results in a rich learning and teaching experience. Teaching is effectively managed, although there is scope for simplification of management structures and for roles and lines of responsibility to be clarified. Significant expansion of taught student numbers is planned in the next 10 years. The Review found the School to be well placed to deal with this expansion, but recognised that the College will need to undertake substantial upgrading of the estate to manage the increased numbers. Separation of Biological and Biomedical Science student intakes from 2015/16 will have a significant impact on Biological Sciences, but positive discussions about the way in which this will be managed are underway. The School is carrying out an Undergraduate Teaching Review to consider the appropriateness and distinctiveness of its provision. This was considered timely by the Review Team, and the School is being encouraged to assess whether there is scope for consolidation at Honours programme level, and whether there would be merit in introducing an MBiol Programme. Biological Sciences provides its students with effective support: Personal Tutors are, in the main, highly committed to their roles, although some variation does exist within the system. Student Support Tutors provide an outstanding service. Widening participation students receive additional assistance, and there may be scope for further development in this area. The quality of the course and programme documentation provided for students is high. Much work has been done by the School to embed graduate attributes within the curriculum and to improve the quality and timeliness of student feedback. Formative feedback opportunities are now incorporated into every course, and clear information is provided in course and programme documentation on both graduate attributes and feedback. Notwithstanding this, some students remain unclear in these areas, and the School is therefore being advised to review the effectiveness of its graduate attribute and feedback-related communication. Assessment, progression and achievement are managed effectively. Progression rates are excellent. The Review Team is proposing that the School takes steps to ensure consistency of practice across all Honours exam boards, and considers the most effective and efficient ways of assessing, remaining cognisant of turnaround times and staff workloads. Robust arrangements are in place for the monitoring of quality, and it is the view of the Review Team that simplification and clarification of management structures will assist with embedding enhancement and best practice. Key Strengths 1. The Review Team commends the restructuring of LTC undertaken in 2012/13 to put in place a structure that better reflects the School s learning and teaching model. (2.1.2) 2. The Review Team commends the School s decision to increase transparency by publishing its workload allocation model. (2.1.7) 3. The Review Team commends the work of the Biology Teaching Organisation (BTO). (2.1.8) 4. The Review Team commends the recent appointment of large numbers of Chancellor s Fellows. (2.1.9) 5. The Review Team commends the positive spirit in which discussions relating to the changes to Biological Sciences and Biomedical Sciences student intakes are being taken forward. (2.1.12) 2

3 6. The positive working relationships and effective management structures that are in place for shared teaching are commended. (2.1.13) 7. The Review Team commends the School s highly motivated teaching staff. (2.2.1) 8. The Undergraduate Teaching Review is commended. (2.2.3) 9. The College of Science and Engineering is commended for taking steps to reduce cyclical oscillation in student numbers in Biological Sciences. (2.3.2) 10. The School is commended for steady increase in overall postgraduate taught student numbers. (2.3.4) 11. The School and Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh are commended for undertaking increased marketing in 2014/15 resulting in higher applicant numbers for 2015/16. (2.3.5) 12. The commitment of the Personal Tutors interviewed by the Review Team is commended. (2.4.1) 13. The School s Student Support System is commended. (2.4.5) 14. The School is commended for the quality of its course and programme documentation. (2.4.8, 2.5.1) 15. Biological Sciences is commended for the work that has been undertaken to audit and embed graduate attributes within the curriculum and for the clear mapping of graduate attributes within course and programme documentation. (2.5.1) 16. The Review Team commends the way in which the School supports its widening participation students. (2.7.1) 17. The demonstrator s guide considered by the Team during the Review Visit is commended. (2.8.2) 18. Biological Sciences is commended for its commitment to introducing new technologies to innovate its teaching and enhance the student experience. (2.8.3) 19. The School s National Student Survey (NSS) 2014 results are commended. (3.3.1) 20. The School is commended for its excellent progression rates. (3.4.3) 21. Biological Sciences is commended for having robust procedures in place for dealing with Special Circumstances. (3.4.3) 22. Biological Sciences is commended for actively engaging with the University s emerging Vision for Learning and Teaching. (4.1) 23. Biological Sciences is commended for its commitment to using learning technology to innovate its teaching and enhance the student experience. (4.1) Recommendations for Improvement or Enhancement 1. It is recommended that the School reviews its teaching management structure and considers whether there is potential for simplification and clarification of roles. (2.1.6) 2. It is recommended that the College of Science and Engineering continues to consider how it might develop a centralised teaching hub in which the needs of Biological Sciences are central, and in which providing facilities for high-quality, small group teaching is prioritised. (2.1.10, 2.6.3) 3. It is recommended that Biological Sciences continues to examine the viability of the twelve Honours programmes it currently offers and puts in place procedures for assessing objectively the sustainability of programmes. (2.2.4) 4. It is recommended that discussions on maximising flexibility for Biological Sciences students once Biomedical Sciences has its own student intake are continued. (2.1.12) 3

4 5. It is recommended that the School puts in place clear procedures around double-marking and moderation to ensure consistent practice across all Honours exam boards. (3.4.2) 6. It is recommended that the School considers the most effective and efficient ways of assessing, remaining cognisant of turnaround times and staff workloads. (3.4.4) 7. In relation to the Personal Tutor / Student Support System, it is recommended: that the School considers ways in which the quality of the support provided by the Personal Tutors might be assessed and assured. (2.4.2) that the School gives further thought to the nomenclature within its support structures, and specifically considers whether it might be possible to reduce the use of the term Tutor. (2.4.7) that the School enhances training for Personal Tutors regarding service Chemistry courses offered to Biological Sciences students. (2.1.15) 8. In relation to supporting staff, it is recommended: that the School shares relevant information from course evaluation forms with postgraduate tutors and demonstrators. (2.8.1) that the Vice Principal Learning and Teaching includes Human Resources within the ongoing work to improve the Tutoring and Demonstrating system in order to address the issues of differential rates of pay for marking carried out within and outwith laboratory sessions, and lack of recognition within the pay structure that preparation time is required for some demonstrating work. (2.8.1) that the School pursues the idea of introducing mini sabbaticals to allow staff time to develop their teaching. (2.8.3) 9. It is recommended that efforts to improve and formalise Peer Observation of Teaching are continued, and that monitoring of engagement is via Personal Development Reviews (PDRs). (2.8.4) 10. It is recommended that Biological Sciences continues to consider how best to embed enhancement and best practice arising from quality assurance-related activity. (3.2.2) 11. It is recommended that the School gives further consideration to the possibility of introducing an MBiol programme. (2.2.6) 12. It is recommended that ways in which transparency of the teaching allocation model might be increased are considered. (2.1.7) 13. It is recommended that the School considers introducing Personal Development Plans (PDPs) for all students. (2.5.2) 14. It is recommended that the School reviews the effectiveness of its communication to students on graduate attributes, programme navigation and course choice and formative feedback. ( , 3.3.2) 15. It is recommended that the School, in consultation with the College, gives further consideration to the SWAP scheme and assesses whether additional measures are needed to improve outcomes. (2.7.1, 3.1.2) 16. It is recommended that the School investigates way in which taught masters students might be given greater exposure to relevant research activity. (2.2.5) 4

5 Responsibility for Actions Recommendation Responsibility of 1 School 2 College 3 School 4 School 5 School 6 School 7 School 8 School Vice-Principal Learning and Teaching 9 School 10 School 11 School 12 School 13 School 14 School 15 School College 16 School Follow-up to the review The following reports and response are made in the first instance to Senate Quality Assurance Committee, copied to the Dean/Associate Dean/Director for Quality Assurance/Quality Assurance & Enhancement: The review report The 14 week response from the subject area/school The year-on report Thereafter annual reporting on progress towards meeting recommendations will be made through the annual School report to the College Quality Assurance committee or equivalent, which in turn reports to Senate Quality Assurance Committee. 5