UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON CONFIRMED

Transcription

1 UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON CONFIRMED UNIVERSITY QUALITY COMMITTEE AAR Ref 988 Report of the meeting held on 15 May 1997 in Room MN104, School of Legal Studies, Campus to approve the new Award of MA Legal Studies to be offered within the School of Legal Studies in both Full-time and Part-time modes of study. 1. SUMMARY 1.1 NEW AWARD The Panel recommends to the University Quality Committee the approval of the new Award of MA Legal Studies in both Full-time and Part-time modes of study. Approval was not sought for a Postgraduate Certificate or Postgraduate Diploma. 1.2 CONDITION The Award Handbook is to be re-drafted. Within the Handbook, the entry requirements for the Award are to be re-worded and there must be a list of modules contributing to the Award. 1.3 CONDITION DEADLINE The re-drafted Award Handbook is to be forwarded to the Panel Officer by 2 June 1997 for consideration by the Panel Chair. 1.4 RECOMMENDATION The Award Team should give consideration to the extent to which the research methodology skills of MA Legal Studies students requires strengthening. 1.5 FIRST SCHEDULED REVIEW The first scheduled review of the A ward is scheduled to take place during the 2001/2002 academic year. 2. MEMBERSHIP 2.1 PANEL Mr J Mason (Chair) Ms S Goulbourne Associate Dean, School of Art and Design, University of Head of Law, School of International Studies and Law, Coventry University Dr G Harries Mr S Dean (Officer) Principal Lecturer, School of Computing and Information Technology, University of Quality Assurance Officer, Department for Total Quality Management, University of MA Legal Report Page 1 of 5 Confirmed

2 2.2 PRESENTING TEAM Mr R Hughes (Key Proposer) Mrs H Barker Mr M Cartwright Principal Lecturer, School of Legal Studies, University of. Senior Lecturer, School of Legal Studies, University of Principal Lecturer, School of Legal Studies, University of Ms B Griffin Associate Dean, School of Legal Studies, University of 3. BACKGROUND The School of Legal Studies (SLS) offers law graduates the opportunity to study for further academic qualifications through the provision of a postgraduate programme leading to the Award of an LLM (Master of Laws). The School also provides opportunities for non law graduates to study the Common Professional Examinations (CPE). Success in these latter examinations (leading to the Award of LLDip (Diploma in Laws» enables students to go on to complete the vocational stage of training with a view to qualifying as a solicitor or barrister. the students are postgraduate in that they have obtained a degree but they are not law graduates. The School feels that these students, on successful completion of the LLDip, should have the opportunity to continue their academic studies and gain an award at Masters level. The School has therefore proposed the addition of the Award of MA Legal Studies to the School's portfolio. It is proposed that the MA Award is linked to the LLDip, which was radically changed in Furthermore, similar changes to the LLDip Award at the University of have been made elsewhere making it possible for students who have studied at other institutions to continue their studies at Masters level at if they so wish. 4. FORMAT OF THE EVENT A presentation was delivered by the Presenting Team setting out the background to the proposal. With the Presenting Team observing, the Panel then held a meeting to formulate an agenda for discussion. The Panel then discussed with the Presenting Team the issues set out in the remainder of this report. 5 AWARD STRUCTURE Students entering the MA in Legal Studies will already possess the LLDip and this will have given students 60 credits towards the completion of the MA Award. Students will then require a further 60 credits to achieve the MA Award. Students will undertake one of the following patterns of study: 60 credit project, or 45 credit project and one 15 credit module, or 30 credit project and two 15 credit modules. Students undertaking the taught modules will be taught along side LLM students and the Panel questioned how large the pool of modules available will be. It was explained that students will select their modules from a pool of seventeen modules, although the number will increase as the School's postgraduate portfolio increases in size. The Panel requested that the Award Handbook include a list of modules MA Legal Report Page 2 of 5 Confirmed

3 contributing to the Award. 6. ENTRY REQUIREMENTS The draft Award Handbook submitted to the Panel indicated that students will be eligible to enter the Award if they have successfully completed the Postgraduate Diploma in Laws (LLDip) or equivalent. The Panel questioned what will be deemed as an equivalent qualification to the LLDip. The Panel was informed that not all LLDip qualifications within the country have been credit rated at level 4 and that the term' or equivalent' had been included to incorporate LLDip qualifications not achieved at the University of or at Holborn College, London, under the School's franchising arrangement. The Panel felt that those applying with non University of LLDip Awards should be processed through the School's procedure for the Accreditation of Prior Achievement (AP A) and requested the re-wording of the statement regarding entry requirements within the Award Handbook. The Panel was aware that the decision taken across the United Kingdom to approve the LLDip at level 4 has lead to a variety of practices in respect of credit accumulation. It is possible at some institutions to undertake the LLDip followed by the Legal Practice Course (LPC) and, with both being deemed eligible as 60 level 4 AP A credits, to achieve an LLM Award. The Panel was informed that the School of Legal Studies does not wish students to achieve an LLM Award via such a route as the LPC is a practitioner Award and does not combine with the LLDip to provide a cohesive LLM A ward. Those entering the LLM Award must have an LLB Award or equivalent and the Panel was informed that those achieving the LLDip would be deemed as having achieved 'equivalence' and could therefore enter the LLM without any accreditation of prior achievement. The School feels that the addition of the MA in Legal Studies will maximise the use of students' prior achievement by providing LLDip students the opportunity to further their studies and gain an MA, and LPC students the opportunity to further their studies and gain an LLM. The Panel commended the identification of different A wards for different student groups but questioned whether it was then feasible for different student groups to be taught along side each other and yet obtain different awards with different outcomes. It was explained that the fundamental difference between those undertaking the LLM and the MA in Legal Studies will be the pre-requisites and admissions criteria, with those undertaking the LLM having a pure law background and those undertaking the MA not having a pure law background but also acquiring 120 level 4 credits in the academic study of law. 7. PROJECTS 7.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The Panel questioned whether students will study research methodology prior to the commencement of a project. It was explained that the School does not have a discrete postgraduate module to provide students with research methodology skills. Those undertaking a project on the LLM undertake the research skills at the commencement of their project as an integral aspect of the project module. It was also explained that those entering the Award will already possess a first degree and have completed the LLDip, which requires the production of a 4,000 word project, and that students will already have acquired research methodology skills during their prior studies. The Panel was informed that the School has recently appointed a Reader and that it is intended that research tools and methodology will be offered to students from the 1998/9 academic year and that it is likely that the School will insist that the study of research methodology will be a pre-requisite to a 60 credit project. The Panel welcomed the fact that the School had identified the need to develop the research MA Legal Report Page 3 of 5 Confirmed

4 methodology skills of students but recommended that the Award Team give consideration to the extent to which the research methodology skills of MA Legal Studies students requires strengthening PROJECT SIZE The Panel was aware that students could choose to undertake a project of 30, 45 or 60 credits and questioned how students will be assisted in their selection of the size of the project to undertake. The Panel was informed that the School has guidelines as to what constitutes a project of 30, 45 or 60 credits and that these guidelines covered the degree of evaluation, analysis, use of primary and secondary data sources and the use of critical thinking. Whilst the Panel accepted that the School's policy in respect of projects is to provide flexibility in project size to meet the needs of individual students, the Panel questioned whether students, as they will be self-financing, will tend to undertake a 60 credit project, rather than taught modules, as the student can conveniently undertake their study without taking time off from work. It was explained that students undertaking Masters projects within the School know whether or not they wish to concentrate on researching a specific area and whether or not there are particular modules they wish to study and that this knowledge is very often influenced by the student's professional practice. The Panel accepted that the students will be professionals who will select an appropriate balance between taught module and project work to suit their particular needs. The Panel was informed that the mechanisms for counselling students, facilitating the choice of project size, and supervision of projects will be identical to those practices currently governing LLM projects. The Panel welcomed this and questioned whether there were any statistics on the number of students withdrawing from 60 credit projects and it was explained that all students commencing a 60 credit project have completed. The Panel questioned whether the School has a committee to approve and register projects. It was explained that all student projects are recorded in the minutes of a Subject Board meeting. The Panel questioned whether students can commence study on a 60 credit project and then, part way through the project,, fallback' to a 45 or 30 credit project. It was explained that this is not allowed by the School. 8. RESOURCES The Panel was informed that there were no resource implications within the School following the implementation of the Award. The Panel questioned whether the support students will require for projects, particularly those undertaking one of 60 credits, will place a burden on staffing resources. It was explained that the Award will widen the opportunities for postgraduate study within the School and will maintain student numbers rather than increase them, with likely student recruitment to the Award being between 5 and 10 students per year. The Panel was also informed that staff timetables are weighted to allow for project supervision undertaken. The submission documentation provided information about the School's plans to develop a postgraduate study centre and the Panel asked for additional details. It was explained that the School currently has one research room but that this only houses up to 3 staff at anyone time. The School is looking to increase the capacity of its research room and will set up a quiet room that is sufficient to support staff, research students and Masters students within the School. The Panel commended the consideration given by the School to the need to provide additional support to those undertaking research. 9. REGULATIONS The Panel was informed that modules are graded using the University's Grade Point Scale and that the Award will not be available with a distinction. The Panel questioned whether the number of modules a student will be allowed to fail was governed by a credit envelope. It was explained that as with the LLM there will be no credit envelope. The Panel accepted that the University regulations do not require Award Teams to impose a credit envelope but informed MA Legal Report Page 4 of 5 Confirmed

5 the Award Team of the need to comply with University regulations should the need to impose a credit envelope be introduced. The Panel also informed the Award Team of the potential problems for a student undertaking a very large project and failing should the University impose a credit envelope. The Award Team was aware of the need to conform to University regulations and informed the Panel that should the University impose the need to implement a credit envelope, approval will be sought to amend the Award regulations and that the MA Legal Studies Award Regulations and Award Handbook will include such a requirement. The Panel questioned whether the Award will fit into the School's tiered assessment board structure. It was explained that the modules are all considered at Subject Boards within the School and that the School then operates Award Boards for the consideration of the various postgraduate Awards within the School, of which the MA Legal Studies will become one. The Panel questioned whether the School operated a mitigating circumstances board at postgraduate level. It was explained that all the School's postgraduate mitigating circumstances are looked at by one Panel as the number is very small and does not warrant the establishment of a full mitigating circumstances board as at undergraduate level. The Panel questioned whether students from abroad will wish to undertake the Award and so introduce the need to assess English language competence of incoming students. It was explained that the LLDip Award is not made available via distance learning and that overseas students do not undertake the LLDip as it is not recognised worldwide. The Panel accepted that the English competence of incoming students will not be an issue. 10 CONCLUSIONS The Panel commended the School of Legal Studies on the clear thinking in widening and strengthening the School's postgraduate portfolio to meet the needs of different student groups. The Panel recommends the approval of the Award of MA Legal Studies subject to the satisfactory fulfilment of the condition set out in section 1.2 of this report. 11 POST-EVENT FEEDBACK 6 post-event feedback questionnaires were distributed, of which 2 were completed and returned. None were returned by the Presenting Team. The Panel members who responded felt that: the event was very well organised and that the venue and catering arrangements were good the submission documentation provided adequate information and was easily understandable the supporting papers prepared by the Officer put the event adequately into context the programme for the day was entirely appropriate all had sufficient opportunity to contribute all major issues were raised and given adequate attention the meeting was informal, open, cooperative and participative Drafted by Officer: 7 August 1997 Sent to Chair: 7 August 1997 Returned by Chair: 18 August 1997 Amended: 18 August 1997 Circulated to Panel, Key Proposer and UQC Secretary: 19 August 1997 Considered by UQC: 18 September 1997 Confirmed: 24 September 1997 MA Legal Report Page 5 of 5 Confirmed