Transcript 2006 Academic Regulations - Anglia Ruskin University

Briefing on the 2nd Edition of
the Academic Regulations
An enhanced version of the
presentation made in the briefing
sessions held in Autumn 2008
Briefing on the 2nd Edition of the
Academic Regulations
Facilitators:
Paul Baxter, Assistant Director (Quality Systems), Academic Office
[[email protected]]
Malcolm Morrison, Director, Academic Office
[[email protected]]
Marian Redding, Head of Modular Programmes
[[email protected]]
Autumn 2008
Overview
•
The Review of the Academic Regulations was not a review of
key principles of the 15/30 credit curriculum but a review of
implementation, interpretation and operational issues
•
specifically to:
 eliminate ambiguity/scope for misinterpretation
 improve clarity (to ensure consistency of practice)
 incorporate new awards (MDes, MFA)
 reflect Support Service restructuring
Briefing on the 2nd Edition of
the Academic Regulations
Associate Students and Intermission
Associate Students
(Regulation 2.16)
• Associate Student status has been reinstated for students enrolling
for one or more taught modules totalling up to and including 60
credits
• reinstatement anticipates employer engagement/higher skills @work
initiative (ie provision of tailor-made CPD training, not necessarily
leading to an award)
Associate Students (cont.)
(Regulation 2.16)
• must take all assessment elements and are awarded credit for
successful completion
• must satisfy general entry requirements
• are registered in a named Faculty with approval of Dean (or
designated alternate)
• are required to pay an economic tuition fee (ie pro rata to full time
home/EU tuition fee for 120 credits: £3145 in 2008/09)
Intermission
(Regulations 3.28 - 3.33)
• week 3 deadline for intermission requests has been withdrawn
• period of intermission may be for up to 12 calendar months - not
linked to multiples of semesters or trimesters
• must have an approved start date and an approved end date (day,
month year) - not necessarily coinciding with start and end dates of
semester/trimester
• return date must take account of academic coherence and
requirements of pathway on which student is registered
Intermission (cont.)
(Regulations 3.28 - 3.33)
• a student who does not re-register within 20 working days of
approved return date is discontinued but may subsequently seek readmission [NEW]
• as registered students, intermitting students have access to certain
Anglia Ruskin facilities but are no longer “active” and therefore are
not entitled to other benefits/services (eg Council Tax exemption)
• intermission is a serious decision and prior advice from Student
Adviser / Programme Leader (or equivalent in partner institution) is
strongly recommended
• intermission is included within the maximum period of registration
Briefing on the 2nd Edition of
the Academic Regulations
Admission, Re-Admission and
Accredited Prior Learning (APL)
Admission
(Section 4)
4.2 Age of entrants: We can accept applicants under 17.5 and
admissions will advise on the process
4.5 General entry requirements: Use of supplementary information
form where applicants do not meet entry requirements
4.50 Criminal Convictions
Admission
Faculty
Applications
processed for
2008/09 entry
Students admitted by
October 2008
ALSS
4807
1659
AIBS
3532
1559
FoE
2086
697
FHSC
3771
1086
FST
5437
1941
Total
19,641
6942
Re-Admission
(Section 4)
4.13: A student who has been discontinued from a pathway by a
Faculty Awards Board because of academic failure is not
permitted to apply for re-admission to the same pathway
unless all the following criteria has been met:
•
At least 12 months has lapsed between the date of
discontinuation and the date of the application for readmission
Continued…
Re-Admission
(Section 4)
Regulation 4.13 cont: The student is able:
•
•
•
to provide clear evidence of a change in personal circumstances
since the date of discontinuation
to demonstrate a positive commitment to resume study at higher
education level
to demonstrate an enhanced knowledge-base and/or relevant
experience e.g. based on employment in the period since the date
of discontinuation
AND the student has been formally interviewed by at least two
members of academic staff whose decision to re-admit the student is
unanimous.
Accreditation of
Prior Learning
Key information to remember:
•
•
•
•
•
Internal Applicants, Tariffs
Admissions Tutor and AP(E)L Adviser Roles
Streamlined process and use of Committee
Forms and information from website
http://web.anglia.ac.uk/curriculum/accreditation_prior_learning.phtml
Students must be informed re providing evidence
See Student Charter:
http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/students/pdfs/11473_Charter_16ppA5.pdf
Accreditation of
Prior Learning
4.29, 4.34
& 4.41
4.28
4.33 & 4.40
2/3 rule
• 2/3 but with clarification
on ordinary / honours
scenario
2nd week rule
• 2nd week now ensures
no retrospectives
5 year rule
• 5 year rule evidence
outlined
Accreditation of
Prior Learning
5 Year Rule – For prior (certificated and
experiential) learning after 5 years
Regulations 4.33 and 4.40:
• Currency
• Evidence
•
An employer reference and CV
•
Evidence of successful completion of relevant CPD training
•
A reflective statement detailing how knowledge and practice has
remained up to date
Accreditation of
Prior Learning
You can check on the J: drive for information on which APL
applications have been approved at:
J:\Administration\Academic Office\Public\Accreditation of Prior
Learning (APL)\University Registry\004 CENTRAL APPROVALS LIST
(CAL)\Central Approvals List.xls
Statistical Data Highlighting the Workload
of the APL Sub-Group in 2008
Date of APL Sub-group
meeting
ALSS
AIBS
FHSC
FST
APL per
mtng
Retro per
mting
APEL per
mting
SAL per
mting
08 Jan 2008
2
17
18
19
8
64
35
1
0
25 Jan 2008
3
5
10
6
15
39
25
0
0
15 Feb 2008
5
5
24
14
3
51
33
5
0
14 Mar 2008
11
8
4
22
15
60
44
3
3
11 Apr 2008
6
3
0
3
3
15
2
1
0
9 May 2008
12
11
2
10
18
53
20
0
0
10 Jun 2008
5
9
3
3
8
28
7
0
0
04 Jul 2008
8
13
13
2
17
53
16
1
2
08 Jul 2008 *
0
8
0
1
2
11
8
0
0
22 Aug 2008
3
7
0
1
0
11
4
0
0
29 Aug 2008
0
5
0
0
0
5
1
0
0
5 Sep 2008
1
5
0
1
1
8
0
0
0
12 Sep 2008
1
1
27
0
11
40
1
21
0
18 Sep 2008
0
3
2
1
4
10
3
2
0
26 Sep 2008
0
8
2
0
6
16
6
0
1
03 Oct 2008
2
8
0
1
2
13
1
1
0
17 Oct 2008
2
1
0
1
3
7
6
1
0
31 Oct 2008
0
0
16
2
6
24
24
0
0
FoE
Statistical Data Highlighting Applicants
Admitted with Credit (via SITS) for 2008/09
Accreditation of
Prior Learning
Admissions Office (number of applicants admitted via SITS)
TOTAL
ALSS
AIBS
Education
FHSC
S&T
Via Pathway Tariff
4
33
1
1
51
90
Progression Routes (PSF)
0
58
0
0
0
58
APL Subcom/Subgroup
4
3
3
26
52
88
Internal Applications
3
149
0
1
80
233
Supplementary Info (non standard)
19
22
1
26
76
144
Pathway Tariff + APL
Subcom/Subgroup
0
0
0
0
3
3
Total
616
Statistical Data Highlighting APL Applicants for
2008/09 administered by Faculty APL Advisers
Accreditation of
Prior Learning
Applications Approved by Faculty APL Advisers (18th July to 31st October 2008)
Total
ALSS
AIBS
FoE
FHSC
S&T
Approved
49
42
29
76
108
304
Conditional
9
4
2
11
24
50
Clarification
1
1
0
4
0
6
Rejected
1
0
0
0
0
1
60
47
31
91
132
361
TOTAL BY FACULTY
Briefing on the 2nd Edition of
the Academic Regulations
Failure After Re-Assessment:
Retake and Replacement Modules
Some Questions….
Under the 1st Edition of the
Academic Regulations….
Q1: ….how many attempts at a module’s assessment
was a student permitted?
A1: One - and if the student failed the first attempt, a
second attempt (NB: it is incorrect to tell students
they are entitled to two attempts at a module when
the second attempt is solely to improve a mark of
40% or above obtained at the first attempt)
Under the 1st Edition of the
Academic Regulations….
Q2: ….if a student exhausted all permitted attempts on
a compulsory module, what happened?
A2: the Student could not continue on the pathway for
which they were registered (see regulations
governing ‘continuation’ in Section 8)
Under the 1st Edition of the
Academic Regulations….
Q3:
….if a student exhausted all permitted attempts on
a designated module, what happened?
A3:
the Student could select a ‘replacement’
designated module from those modules listed in
the PSF
Consequences of module
failure after two attempts
• In the first edition of the Academic Regulations, Regulation 6.69
provided exemption for some pathways re compulsory modules
• Usually related to compulsory nature of all modules on the pathway
and the requirements of professional, statutory and regulatory
bodies (PSRBs)
• Inconsistent and unfair; students on different pathways being treated
differently
• Potential continued increase in list of pathways in 6.69
• More exemptions than those following the original regulation
(exception rather than the rule!)
• Potential on pathway design and reduction in student choice
Consequences of module
failure after two attempts
(6.66 – 6.71: replacing provision under 6.69 in the First Edition)
• compulsory modules: student may ‘re-take’ the entire module, with
attendance
• designated module: may either ‘retake’ the same module OR
replace with an alternative module at the same level as detailed on
the PSF (all with full attendance)
There are limits:
• replacement and re-take modules permitted up to a maximum of 60
credits in total and 30 credits for any one level
• not applicable to 45 and 60 credit modules
Re-take and
Replacement Modules
(6.66 – 6.71)
• replacement modules are not capped; standard module
assessment regulations apply (eg: qualification mark, maximum of
two attempts etc.)
• re-take modules are capped at 40%; other standard module
assessment regulations apply (eg: qualification mark, maximum of
two attempts etc.)
• For modules which are being re-taken, individual assessment
element marks from the previous take are NOT carried forward
• once all re-take and/or replacement module opportunities are
exhausted, the student is automatically considered under
regulations governing continuation
Re-take and
Replacement Modules
• Academic Standards are maintained
• Reduce early transfers to Framework Awards
• Contributes to aiding retention
• Fair and consistent
• Implemented for the first time from Semester 1, 2008/09
Briefing on the 2nd Edition of
the Academic Regulations
Exercises
Exercises
The next four slides provide four exercises to help test your
understanding of the revised Academic Regulations.
You are presented with four examples of a typical student profile.
The task for each exercise is simply to determine the
recommendations for the failed modules that the Student Review
Subcommittee should make to its Faculty Awards Board in
accordance with the revised Academic Regulations (ie: the
Second Edition, July 2008).
For the purpose of these exercises, the default Academic
Regulations apply (eg: the qualifying mark is at 30%).
Good luck!
Exercise A
Module Level
Credit Value
Mark Detail
Comment
(where necessary)
Module 1
1
30 credits
58%
Compulsory
Module 2
1
15 credits
64%
Compulsory
Module 3
1
15 credits
34%
After 1 attempt Compulsory
Module 4
1
15 credits
53%
Compulsory
Module 5
1
30 credits
32%
Module 6
1
15 credits
44%
ex (50%): 30%;
cw (50%): 34%
After 2 attempts –
Compulsory
Designated
In this example, a re-sit is offered for Module 3 and Module 5 is compensated – no
retake or replacement module is required
Exercise B
Module Level
Credit Value
Mark Detail
Comment
(where necessary)
Module 1
1
30 credits
58%
Compulsory
Module 2
1
15 credits
64%
Compulsory
Module 3
1
15 credits
34%
After 1 attempt Designated
Module 4
1
15 credits
53%
Designated
Module 5
1
30 credits
32%
Module 6
1
15 credits
44%
ex (50%): 4%;
cw (50%): 60%
After 2 attempts –
Designated
Compulsory
In this example, a re-sit is offered for Module 3. Module 5 can’t be compensated - the
module can either be retaken or replaced
Exercise C
Module Level
Credit Value
Mark Detail
Comment
(where necessary)
Module 1
2
30 credits
58%
Compulsory
Module 2
2
15 credits
64%
Compulsory
Module 3
2
15 credits
34%
After 1 attempt Compulsory
Module 4
2
15 credits
53%
Compulsory
Module 5
2
45 credits
32%
ex (50%): 30%;
cw (50%): 34%
After 2 attempts –
Compulsory
(NB: 15 credits of replacement/retake modules taken at level 1)
In this example, a re-sit is offered in Module 3. Module 5 cannot be compensated,
retaken or replaced due to the module’s value of 45 credits
Exercise D
Module Level
Credit Value
Mark Detail
Comment
(where necessary)
Module 1
3
30 credits
58%
Compulsory
Module 2
3
15 credits
64%
Compulsory
Module 3
3
15 credits
34%
After 1 attempt Designated
Module 4
3
15 credits
53%
Designated
Module 5
3
30 credits
20%
Module 6
3
15 credits
44%
ex (50%): 30%;
cw (50%): 10%
After 2 attempts –
Designated
Compulsory
(NB: 30 credits of replacement/retake modules taken at level 1 and 15 credits of
replacement/retake modules taken at level 2)
In this example, a re-sit is offered for Module 3. Module 5 cannot be
compensated, retaken or replaced as the maximum limits will be exceeded
Briefing on the 2nd Edition of
the Academic Regulations
Re-assessment After Further Attendance
and Student Initiated Pathway Transfer
Re-assessment after
further attendance
Regulation 6.61 and 7.6 (bullet 5)
• NOT to be confused with retaking a module
• Regulations clarified to specify when the second attempt for a
module (the re-sit) can be undertaken only after further attendance
• The DAP can determine that further attendance is required when the
nature of the subject area of the module and its assessment deem
further attendance to be necessary (eg: laboratory based work)
Student Initiated
Pathway Transfer
(8.9 – 8.13)
• Student submits a request, in writing, to the receiving Programme
Leader BEFORE completion of the original pathway
• Request evaluated by Programme Leader who determines credit to
be transferred and any other conditions
• Programme Leader recommends transfer to both out-going and
receiving Student Review Subcommittees
Student Initiated
Pathway Transfer (cont.)
(8.9 – 8.13)
• If any conditions are satisfied, the Student Review Sub-committee
recommends the transfer to the FAB
• The original award is NOT conferred by the FAB
• Transfer to a pathway leading to a higher award is not permitted if
original registration has been discontinued for academic reasons
Briefing on the 2nd Edition of
the Academic Regulations
Assessment Offences and
Other Technical Issues
Assessment Offences
(Section 10)
• the penalty tariffs for assessment offences have been recalibrated
• a table (pp 103-104) makes explicit the penalties for an assessment
offence, admitted by a student, when committed in initial assessment
or re-assessment [NB the penalties and consequences differ
between assessment and re-assessment]
Assessment Offences
(cont.)
(Section 10)
• the penalty tariffs for offences at Level 4 are shown separately and
are heavier than before
• the penalties at all levels are heavier if an alleged offence is proved
at a hearing (Reg 10.40 – 10.44) eg the arithmetic mean used for
an award classification is reduced by 5 or 10 percentage points
(depending on circumstances), possibly resulting in lower
classification, but not a fail
Other Technical Issues
•
introduction of MDes and MFA (Regs 2.24, 3.23 etc - see index for
other references)
•
HNC reclassified as a Level 1 award (Reg 2.35)
•
HND increased from 180 to 240 credits wef Sept 2008, as required
by Edexcel (Reg 2.24)
•
module results for modules contributing to an HNC/HND are
classified consistently across all Faculties, as required by Edexcel
(Reg 6.26)
•
Associate/Deputy Deans or Director of Studies can be DAP Chairs
ie Chair is not restricted to a Head of Department, as previously
(Reg 7.7)
Other Technical Issues
(cont.)
•
criteria and principles for transfer to a framework award have been
regulated (Regs 2.11, 2.12, 7.18, 8.3 - 8.5)
•
consequences of failure at Level 3, including conferment of Ordinary
degree, have been made explicit (Regs 2.12 and 8.3 – 8.5)
•
circumstances under which excess credit within a semester can be
taken have been explicitly defined (Reg 2.16)
•
consequences of exceeding word limit in re-assessed work have
been made explicit and methodology for applying penalty has been
clarified (Reg 6.58)
•
merit classification has been introduced for PG pathways whose
credit value is at least 120 credits
Briefing on the 2nd Edition of
the Academic Regulations
Thank you for reading this presentation
If you have any queries, please do not
hesitate to e-mail any of the facilitators
(e-mail addresses are displayed at the beginning of the presentation)