UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON · Roger Carpenter (School of Health, Sport and Bioscience) Fahima Miah...

1

SCHOOL OF PSYCHOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON

Confirmed minutes of the meeting of the School of Psychology Quality Standing Committee (SPQSC) held on

Wednesday 19th March 2014 at 2pm in Room AE.2.06 (Stratford Campus).

Present:

Amanda Roberts (Chair) Rachel George Richard Ralley

Elizabeth Attree Gordon Jinks Donald Ridley

Roger Carpenter (School of Health, Sport and

Bioscience) Fahima Miah (Student Rep)

Nazmin Uddin (QAE

Rep)

Lara Frumkin Rachel Mulvey

In Attendance for programme re-validation panels:

Item 10.1.3 Paul Penn as Programme Leader for BSc (Hons.) Psychology Extended programme

Item 10.1.4 Joy Coogan as Programme Leader for BSc (Hons.) Psychology & BSc (Hons.) Forensic Psychology

Item 10.1.4 Anna Stone Programme Leader for BSc (Hons.) Psychology by distance learning

Servicing Officer: William Munday

1. APOLOGIES Pippa Dell and Carla Gibbes were unable to attend and had sent their apologies.

2. TERMS OF REFERENCE

2.1 NONE

3. MINUTES

3.1 APPROVED and CONFIRMED

3.1.1 Minutes of Previous Meeting.

The minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 26th February 2014 were approved as a true and accurate record.

Action: WM to forward minutes to QAE.

4. MATTERS ARISING

4.1 RECEIVED & NOTED

4.1.1 All matters arising from the minutes were either complete or included on the agenda, except for the following:

Action: To submit CDG approved suspension of programme form for MSc Applied Psychology.

Action: To check outstanding action required of Director of Student Life. The committee was unsure exactly what the

outstanding response concerned but noted it was still outstanding.

The Chair noted that the Regulations Committee approved the Professional Doctorate Counselling Psychology team’s

request to run a 90 credit module over the entire academic year and have assessment in January and other requests

relating to registration. The Chair was expecting final approval at the next Academic Board due on the 2nd April.

The Chair confirmed that the table of conditions from the professional body accreditation of the Professional Doctorate

in Occupational Psychology had not been updated.

2

5. EXTERNAL EXAMINERS

5.1. RECEIVED, NOTED & APPROVED

5.1.1 External Examiners due to complete term of office:

The committee noted the progress and outstanding actions regarding nomination forms: Field/Programme Title Examiner’s

Name

End Date Progress Action

Psychological Interventions Arti Kumar 30/09/2014 Noted SH to provide replacement

Psychological Interventions Karl Gregory 30/09/2014 Noted SH to provide replacement

Psychological Interventions Diane Hardman 30/09/2014 Noted SH to provide replacement

Psychological Interventions Samantha Jamson 28/02/2014 Noted SH to provide replacement

Professional Practice in Psychology Deborah Chinn 30/09/2014 Noted SH to provide replacement

Professional Practice in Psychology Peter Elliott 30/09/2014 See Item 5.1.5 See Item 5.1.5

Professional Practice in Psychology Nick Durbin 30/09/2014 Noted SH to provide replacement

Professional Practice in Psychology Andrew Richards 30/09/2014 Noted SH to provide replacement

Professional Practice in Psychology Yvette Primrose 30/09/2014 Noted SH to provide replacement

Psychological Sciences Sarah Riley 30/09/2014 Noted SH to provide replacement

Psychological Sciences Elaine Duncan 30/09/2014 Noted SH to provide replacement

The committee noted the list of external examiners due to complete their contract and advised Subject Area

Leaders to note as the School had been advised to have External Examiners in place by June.

5.1.2 External Examiners Reports not received 2012/13

Field/Programme Title Examiner’s

Name Received Yes/No Action

Psychological Sciences Diane Hardman Yes Completed

Psychological Interventions Deborah Chinn No Subject Head awaiting response

The committee noted that Deborah Chinn’s response was still outstanding.

5.1.3 School responses to External Examiners reports outstanding:

Field/Programme Title Examiner’s

Name Action

Psychological Interventions Chris Evans GJ to extract response from REP and forward to

QAE.

Psychological Interventions Michelle Stewart SH checking response with programme leaders

Psychological Interventions Madeleine Grealy SH checking response with programme leaders

Psychological Sciences Philip Banyard Director of Student Life to respond

Psychological Interventions Kate Maguire GJ to ensure collaborative partner forward on response

letter to QAE.

Professional Practice in Psychology Peter Elliott Complete.

The Committee heard that the three Psychological Interventions External Examiners responses had not moved further

since last meeting. Action: Subject Heads to send outstanding responses. Action: WM to check whether Peter

Elliott’s response has been completed.

5.1.4 Sem B modules without External Examiners

The committee received the table of modules that were running without having external examiners appointed. It was

noted that this had been caused mostly by the revalidation of the BSc Counselling Programme in 2012/13 when new

modules were not allocated, and students on the ICS distance learning legacy programme choosing modules at the start

of semester. External Examiner extension of duties forms were tabled (see items 5.1.6 & 5.1.7) to address the BSc

Counselling omission. The Chair reported that the issue of transitional modules was discussed at the External

Examiners sub-committee and the number of modules external examiners can review can be increased on a temporary

basis as long as valid rationale is given.

3

5.1.5 External Examiner Nomination Form for Anna Cooke

The committee approved this external examiners nomination form noting that they would be replacing Peter Elliott.

The committee noted that this experienced nominee did not have previous external examiner experience and asked the

Subject Leader to nominate a named mentor prior to being sent to QAE for approval.

Action: Subject Leader to confirm named mentor and complete form.

Action: WM to get form signed and sent to QAE.

5.1.6 External Examiner Extension of Duties for Gregory Nolan

The committee approved the extension of duties form for Gregory Nolan noting that this was to update the modules

that this established external examiner reviewed in Semester A and for Semester B 2013/14. The changes are back-

dated due to the delay of the appointment of an external examiner to new modules created during the revalidation of the

BSc Counselling in 2012/13. Action: WM to get form signed and sent to QAE.

5.1.7 External Examiner Extension of Duties for Diane Hardiman

The committee approved the extension of duties form for Diane Hardiman noting that this was to update the modules

that this established external examiner reviewed in Semester A and for Semester B 2013/14. The changes are back-

dated due to the delay of the appointment of an external examiner to new modules created during the revalidation of the

BSc Counselling in 2012/13. Action: WM to get form signed and sent to QAE.

5.1.8 External Examiner Extension of Duties for Koula Asimakopoulou

5.1.9 External Examiner Extension of Duties for Panagiotis Parpottas

The committee approved these extension of duties forms for Koula Asimakopoulou & Panagiotis Parpottas noting that

the externals are part of the team that cover the collaboration agreement with AKMI. The form was backdated to cover

Semester A 2013/14 as the School had been late in appointing an external examiner to cover the modules, having the

first appointment rejected, on the newly validated provision of this collaboration. Koula & Panagiotis had been asked to

review modules as a one-off event prior to the newly appointed external examiner taking up their duties. The

committee noted that the forms would not alter either contracts going forward nor change the extension of duties forms

approved in December. Action: WM to get form signed and sent to QAE.

5.1.10 Assessment and Feedback QSC Audit

The Chair confirmed that the next QSC audit would be reviewing assessment and feedback. She reported that many

External Examiners have reported not seeing work in advance and it had been suggested at the external examiners sub-

committee that all assessment should be sent to External Examiners before the modules start which is in August. The

committee discussed this and felt that all work should be sent in advance within a reasonable timeframe, but August

would not be practicable for a number of reasons.

6. PROGRAMME INITIAL APPROVALS

6.1 NONE

7. PROGRAMME SUSPENSIONS & WITHDRAWALS

7.1 NONE

8. PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION CHANGES

8.1 RECEIVED AND NOTED

8.1.1 CHAIRS ACTION Professional Doctorate Counselling Psychology

4

The committee noted that the change of modules on the programme specification 2013 had been approved by Chairs

Action.

9. MODULE MODIFICATIONS

9.1 RECEIVED & APPROVED

9.1.1 PYM708 Foundations of Positive Psychology by distance learning

The committee approved the change in assessment to this distance learning module. The change had been suggested

due to student feedback and it now aligns with the on-campus module making it a work saving exercise for the module

team. The change consists of merging two components from two 2500 essays to one 5000 word essay. The committee

noted that the recommended reading list seemed to be old so asked the Chair to check with the module leader whether it

is the most recent reading list. Action: AR to confirm approval of change and ask Module Leader to check reading

list. Action: WM to ensure changes are made to Delta.

10. PROGRAMME VALIDATIONS


10.1.1 New Academic Framework Re-validations timetables

The committee noted that the next re-validation for the BSc Clinical and Community and new Undergraduate

dual School provision event would be on 24th April in room RB.G.13 between 11am and 5pm.

10.1.2 SoP APPROVALS TABLE 2013/14

The committee noted the SoP approvals table. The School’s leader for overseas collaboration confirmed that the

potential collaboration based in the Lebanon had been indefinitely put on hold due to nearness of conflict and

instability within the area. The potential collaboration in Morocco would be picked up by the project lead upon

their return to work and the Subject Leader for Professional Practice in Psychology was not in attendance to

give any update on the potential collaboration in Dulwich, Australia. Action: WM to update table and

circulate.

10.1.3 Re-validation of the Extended BSc (Hons.) Psychology

The committee APPROVED the Extended BSc (Hons.) Psychology programme.

The committee noted that the meeting was quorate and in attendance were the following members of the re-validation

panel, Quality Leader – Amanda Roberts, HBS Quality Leader - Roger Carpenter, QAE officer – Nazmin Uddin,

SPSQC member – Richard Ralley, SPSQC member - Donald Ridley and Co-Programme Proposer – Paul Penn.

Comments were received and referred to throughout the meeting from the two external advisors Dr Judy David from

Staffordshire University and Dr Carl Senior from Aston University.

All Panel members had been sent programme documentation prior to the re-validation meeting. Panel members

checked the documentation with reference to the quality criteria and comments sent to the programme team for

response in advance of this meeting.

The Panel had received the following documents:

• Revised programme specification

• Revised module specifications

• Revised validation documentation

• Response documentation detailing all actions taken to comments

• Staff Résumé’s had been sent with original pack

5

The Committee considered each of the 12 quality criteria in turn, noting comments raised by the panel and External

Advisors, and also the team’s responses.

The programme leader for the BSc Psychology Extended Degree confirmed that the programme is there to provide

access to levels 4, 5 & 6 for those students who haven’t done so well on their A’ Level results, older applicants or even

for those that would benefit from an extra year to see whether psychology as a subject is the graduate degree for them.

1) ACADEMIC CLIMATE AND RESOURCES:

In general the panel were happy with the very good resources available. It was noted that the module leader for PY301

had been named. The Chair noted the positive comments from the external advisors regarding the good academic

climate with which the programme would attract the range of applicants that it intended to. Namely the programme

will appeal to a range of possible applicants who do not have the required entry thresholds for 3 year degree

programmes. It was also noted that the contact time on the programme was excellent. The programme leader

confirmed that the errors in the programme specification regarding module structure had been addressed and that he

would be emailing all staff about the possibility of gaining Senior Fellowships with the HEA. The panel asked that he

include in that email the professional framework dates or APL dates. Action: Programme Leader to email all staff

on the programme.

The HSB QL confirmed that it was likely that QAE would require all CV’s on a standardised short format template.

The QAE Representative suggested that she would check to see considering the large amount of work being produced

by the revalidations whether this can be a task for the future rather than a requirement before approval. Action: QAE

Representative to check whether it is essential for this task to be carried out prior to final approval.

The panel approved this section in light of these comments and all other responses made by the programme team.

2) PHILOSOPHY AND PRINCIPLES:

The Chair noted that the aims and objectives were clearly articulated. The Panel asked the programme leader to

elaborate on how the programme stood out as a programme in its own right without deferring important employability

issues to levels 4, 5 & 6 and wondered what the vocational rationale was. The programme leader confirmed that he had

amended the programme specification to elaborate on the transferable skills learnt on the programme. However, he

noted that the programme is primarily a preparatory programme to feed on the BSc Psychology programme and it is

this that is the main focus.

The Chair noted the external advisors complimentary comments suggesting that the programme enables students with

non-traditional backgrounds and entry qualifications to embark of a programme of HE study which aims to equip them

for subsequent study on a Psychology degree programme. The Chair asked the programme leader to respond to the

comment that there was no indication of how the programme would actively encourage participation from groups

underrepresented in higher education.

The programme leader confirmed that he had consulted with the Schools Equality and Diversity leader who had

confirmed that there was a white paper on this coming out in 2015 and he felt that it was wise to wait to read this

government paper before making changes to recruitment. The programme leader noted that throughout the assessment

on the programme there was a reliance on teamwork, group-work so there was a lot of effort in ensuring students work

inclusively. In addition, the admissions team are actively pursuing applicants throughout schools in the local area and

abroad with the message that the programme is for anybody who is interested in studying psychology but without the

traditional qualifications. This would by definition recruit those not fitting the normal psychology applicant profile and

create diversity.

6


3) ADMISSIONS:

The Programme Leader elaborated on how the admissions process works with regard to applicants applying without

traditional qualifications but with relevant work experience instead. He confirmed that there isn’t explicit

paperwork/guidance on this but an applicant with non-traditional qualifications would be invited to an interview with

the programme leader. The programme leader would ask a basic set of competency based questions that would elicit

what experience they have which is transferable to HE study. If applicant is without GCSE level C in English and

Maths they would have to sit the School English and Maths test. If successful, and depending on the programme leader

considering them competent to study at this level, the applicant would be admitted.

The panel noted that all changes requested had been made and the external advisors were happy with the admissions

process and the information provided showed that the intake was normal for the sector. The programme leader

confirmed that he had not been able to find the wording pointed out by the external advisors ‘likely to be successful in

gaining an award’ in the re-validation paperwork. It was suggested that this might be quoted from Part 4 of the Quality

Assurance manual. Action: QAE Representative to follow up on the external advisors comments.


4) STRUCTURE:

The Panel considered that the presentation of the structure of the programme was clear.

The Chair pointed to the panel member’s comments about clarifying whether the programme’s module specifications

should emphasise the content as integrated as without that added emphasis it could look like duplication or overlap. In

addition, the skills module seemed to avoid psychology and should be up-front about this and confirm it is a generic

skills module.

The programme leader responded by confirming he had emphasised the integration between modules and the academic

and skills modules are complimentary making this idea much more explicit.

The Chair noted that both external advisors confirmed that the structure was clearly defined and meaningful and raised

the issue regarding learning outcomes being duplicated.

The programme leader confirmed that assessing the same learning outcomes in different modules is in fact a deliberate

strategy at level 3 as it promotes practice of key skills. This is essential at this level and it conforms to the new

academic framework of distributed assessment where students can see their feedback and implement this in similar

assessments and so see the benefits of feedback.


5) CONTENT:

The Chair confirmed that the content was in line with the aims and objectives. The Quality Leader from HSB

confirmed he was happy with the programme leader’s response to his enquiry about low percentage for contact hours

but noted Learning Outcomes 10 and 11 were still missing from the module specification. Action: PL to ensure

learning outcomes included on final set of paperwork.

7

The Chair noted that others on the panel were happy, including the external advisors who were confident that the

content was consistent with the aims and objectives of the programme. The programme leader responded to the

external advisors enquiry about consideration given to overlap on level 4 by confirming that the skills module is

designed to compliment and interface with the academic modules. In addition, the programme leader confirmed that

the module specifications were student facing but are considered an indicative document rather than a prescriptive one

and that the programme covers all subjects prescribed by the BPS in levels 4 and 5.


6) LEARNING AND TEACHING METHODS:

The chair noted that the panel including external advisors were happy with the wide range and good quality learning

and teaching methods on this programme, noting the comments from the panel that the opportunity to provide more

formative assessment was welcome.

The Associate Dean for the School of Psychology requested that it should be clear on each module specification and in

the programme specification that formative assessment is a teaching method not linked to the grade of the final

summative assessment. To avoid confusion, a set of wording which is explicit, and clarifies formative assessment with

regard to learning and teaching experience should be included on both Module and Programme specifications, in the

following format ‘formative assessment will allow students to monitor their own understanding and teaching staff to

monitor understanding and engagement.’


7) ASSESSMENT:

The panel noted a range of assessment was used across the programme and that the programme team had amended the

omissions in the paperwork of module PY301. The Quality Leader for HSB was happy with the responses to his

comments about over-assessment and was happy with the response that students would have come from a background

where constant assessment is common practice.

The Chair noted that the modules now conformed with the new assessment tariffs. The programme leader responded to

the query that there was not consistency in the assessment weighting of the presentations-some of which were given a

very small weighting (10%) and some more (20%). It was claimed that when low this could lead to students not taking

it seriously as it did not greatly impact on their final grade. Did the students need so many summative assessments

about the same topic?

The programme leader confirmed that the weighting of the presentation was awarded not only by the nature of the

assessment, but also how it sits with the aims of the module. The higher weighted presentations were ‘debates in

psychology’ so would have been awarded the higher weighting due to the importance to the understanding of the

module. The point of replicating assessment is meant to ensure improvement through feedback as well as preparing

level 3 students for the amount of understanding that they would needs to have for a topic before going into a seen

essay exam and write for an hour. Feedback had proven that this repetitive assessment prepared students for the most

common form of assessment on a psychology degree. The programme leader felt that engagement was important rather

than the final mark which reflects what happens in levels 4, 5 and 6 to avoid students becoming selective.

The Chair noted the positive feedback from panel and external advisors and noted that all other comments have been

answered by the programme leader in other items. The programme leader noted that the new format actually had fewer

assessments.

8


8) GUIDANCE AND SUPPORT:

The Chair noted the positive comments from the panel confirming that there was good guidance and support available

for students. The panel wanted to NOTE that the support was exemplary for students on this programme.

The panel was happy that the Cottrell study text reference had been updated.


9) PROGRESSION AND COMPLETION:

The programme leader clarified to the panel that the message to students/applicants was that completion of this

programme only guaranteed a place on the BSc Psychology programme but that students could make a representation

to programme leaders on other undergraduate programmes taught in the School of Psychology if they so wished. The

programme leader did not think that a student would get through the programme if they were not suitable to study on

the programme as the same rules of behaviour and performance would have been enforced and anybody not fit would

have fallen foul to either the attendance policy or disciplinary policy.

In response to the panel’s suggestion of a need for diagnosis and intervention part-way through the programme, the

programme leader confirmed that the continual formative and summative assessment is the method used for monitoring

engagement and forms part of the internal progression monitoring suggested.

The Chair noted that suggestions regarding being more explicit in the programme specification about the requirement

to achieve 120 credits at level 3 to complete the programme had been made. Also the positive comments confirming

that detailed descriptions of progression and completion rates were in the paperwork and that it was obvious to the

external advisor that the programme team monitored these statistics on a regular basis.


10) INFORMATION:

The Chair noted that most of the amendments had been made however that there was still repetitive use in the

descriptors on the learning outcomes of the phrase ‘being able to’. Other issues were noted on the programme

specification regarding the proper title and the created date. Action: The programme leader would amend the typos

noticed and smooth the other paperwork in light of the discussions.

The Chair noted that all other issues had been addressed in the previous items in the panel.


11) STUDENTS’ AND EMPLOYERS’ VIEWS:

The panel noted that student had been consulted but employers’ views had not been sought. The panel asked that the

programme leader contact the programme leader for the BSc Psychology who is also seeking employers’ comments as

these would apply to students who complete this programme. Action: Programme Leader to provide employers

views.

9

It was confirmed that no employability data is collected for students who leave the extended psychology programme

and who do not continue on to the BSc Psychology levels 4, 5 & 6. The programme leader noted that this programme

is marketed entirely as a progression/access opportunity on to levels 4, 5 & 6.

The Chair observed the comments from the external advisors confirming that they had noted student consultation had

occurred and the programme leader confirmed that the structural changes had been passed down to the programme

team by University guidance. Students had been involved with and consulted on this institutional process in the

summer. However, the content of the programme had been developed and informed over the entire life of the

programme via student feedback and solicited in a number of ways through a number of forums such as module

feedback and staff student programme committees.


12) REGULATIONS OF VALIDATING BODIES

The Chair and programme leader confirmed that this does not apply to this programme.

The panel approved this section.

13) OTHER ISSUES

The panel were happy all issues were addressed elsewhere in the documentation or in this meeting.


The Chair noted that the external advisors written approval had been received and noted that the panel and SPQSC

granted unconditional approval for the Extended BSc (Hons.) Psychology - Extended programme.

The panel wished to express their congratulations and commend the programme proposal team for their hard work and

for the excellent paperwork provided. The panel noted that the programme leader who had started the programme had

not been able to complete the process, answer the responses or attend the panel today and offered their commendation

to both colleagues’ efforts in presenting such a complete revalidation package.

The programme leader wished to express his thanks and admiration to his colleague for completing the ground work in

preparing the revalidation paperwork and redesigning the BSc (Hons.) Psychology – Extended programme.

10.1.4 Re-validation of the BSc (Hons.) Psychology, BSc (Hons.) Forensic Psychology, BSc (Hons.)

Developmental Psychology and BSc (Hons.) Psychology by distance learning

The committee APPROVED the BSc (Hons.) Psychology, BSc (Hons.) Forensic Psychology, BSc (Hons.)

Developmental Psychology and BSc (Hons.) Psychology by distance learning programmes.

The committee noted that the meeting was quorate and in attendance were the following members of the re-validation

panel, Quality Leader (QL) – Amanda Roberts, HBS Quality Leader - Roger Carpenter, QAE officer – Nazmin Uddin,

SPSQC member – Rachel Mulvey, SPSQC member - Gordon Jinks and Programme Leader Joy Coogan for the BSc

Psychology who was also covering Pippa Dell leader of the BSc Forensic Psychology, Anna Stone as programme

leader for the BSc Psychology by Distance Learning and Rachel George programme leader for the BSc Developmental

Psychology programme. Comments were received and referred to throughout the meeting from the two external

advisors Dr Mitch Waterman from University of Leeds and Dr Marcia Worrell from Roehampton University.

10

All Panel members had been sent programme documentation prior to the re-validation meeting. Panel members

checked the documentation with reference to the quality criteria and comments sent to the programme team for

response in advance of this meeting.

The Panel had received the following documents:

• Revised programme specification

• Revised module specifications

• Revised validation documentation

• Response documentation detailing all actions taken to comments

• Staff Résumé’s had been sent with original pack

• QAA Benchmark Statements had been sent with original pack

The Committee considered each of the 12 quality criteria in turn, noting comments raised by the panel and External

Advisors, and also the team’s responses.

The BSc Psychology programme leader gave a brief description and overview of the BSc Psychology programme. The

programme has been running successfully at the University for 50 years. The programme has progressed and increased

in size since its inception expanding steadily over the past few years and diversifying into separate programmes in

recent years into programmes such as the BSc Psychology by distance learning, BSc Forensic Psychology and BSc

Developmental Psychology being re-validated today. It has not only diversified into the aforementioned programmes

but also into BSc Clinical and Community and MSc Psychology. The programme leader for BSc Psychology was

confident that the modifications to the programme would facilitate a continuation of this steady increase in the student

intake.

1) ACADEMIC CLIMATE AND RESOURCES:

All panel members felt that there was good academic climate and resources available for the suite of programmes being

re-validated. The programme leader for the BSc Psychology by distance learning confirmed that distance learning

students have available to them all the online materials that are available to on-campus students, access to online library

facilities and in addition text books are posted to them. The panel noted that the accrediting body The British

Psychological Society (BPS) are happy, as per the last audit review that the School has sufficient resources available to

run the many validated programmes within the School.

The Chair referred the panel and programme leaders to the comments of one of the external advisor regarding resources

available for the practical work on the programmes. The programme leader for the BSc Psychology responded on

behalf of all of the on-campus programmes confirming that there are dedicated research laboratories which are used for

level 6 dissertations. Moreover students on levels 4 and 5 have access to the huge computer centre and all have access

to an online version of SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences- statistics software used within the School).

Additionally, students are all given an individual copy of the SPSS software for home installation. In addition, there are

dedicated seminar groups which run through the tasks of the practical classes. In addition, the equipment available in

the School including the Virtual Reality and Baby Laboratory was mentioned in the validation document.

It was noted that the staff student ratio is adequate for the professional body and had been added to the validation

document sent to external advisors.

It was noted that the QAE had advised that staff résumés’ should have been provided on the standard template but it

was not clear whether the large staff cv pack would be required to be transferred onto this template prior to approval or

as a task to be completed in a more appropriate timeframe. Action: QAE Rep & Quality Leader (QL) to confirm

timeframe for task.

11


2) PHILOSOPHY AND PRINCIPLES:

The panel agreed that the programmes have clearly articulated aims and objectives that meet the needs of students and

equip them for subsequent employment.

The Chair noted the external Advisors question as to whether students would be disadvantaged during the transition

period by having to complete additional modules or assessments, expressing concerns over the decision to not phase

these changes over a period of time. The programme leader for the BSc Psychology confirmed that generally the

transition period would allow students to carry over ‘failed’ modules and so wouldn’t impact too greatly on students as

it is already common practice to carry over modules into the following year.

The transition arrangements suggested for students who have joined the programme at level 5 on a Semester B start

would be to allow them to continue onto level 6 with the September starters but be allowed to complete the final term

of level 5 upon completion of that year but by distance learning. This would allow students to avoid extending their

anticipated end date. This structure is common practice on the distance learning programme so has precedent. All

programme leaders confirmed that they were investigating seeking additional funding for the distance learning

programme to provide added support for students who will be studying in this way because of the transitional

arrangements. This would allow them to experience the distance learning modules as if they were on campus students

by being able to contact module leaders via email and phone.

The panel noted that there are only 42 students across the School’s programmes who would be affected by the removal

of a Semester B intake and these were all currently on the programme progressing between current levels 5 and 6 as

there was no Semester B recruitment last year.

The panel noted that the university was introducing summer schools to provide 3 extra weeks of teaching and all

students are being supported by Learning Achievement Advisors/Mentors. The School’s members who attend the

University Transition Group confirmed that all the additional support given to students this year would make it an

advantage rather than disadvantage, and therefore mitigating the enforced changes to student funding that preceded the

urgent implementation of these changes to the academic framework.

The Student Representative queried whether students only half way through level 5 would be sufficiently prepared for

level 6 and if pre-requisites would be a bar. The programme leader for the BSc Psychology confirmed that students

have done this in the past (namely part-time students and combined honours students) and it had worked well. Any

students requiring additional support would seek help from the module leader or from the aforementioned summer

schools. In addition, pre-requisites would not be enforced for the next couple of years to allow a smooth transition.

The programme leader for the BSc Psychology by distance learning confirmed that exams would not be carried out

over the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE), but are held at assessment centres around the UK or British Councils or

other universities if abroad. All exams are administered by trained invigilators under strict guidelines in exactly the

same system as the on-campus students’ exams are held.

The Panel members wanted to commend the programme team noting that the transition period had been clearly

thought through as shown in the clear and well-articulated philosophy and principles section. The programme team had

shown that they have made great efforts to improve the programme into the type of programme that we want our

students to have through the vitality and enthusiasm of this section.


12

3) ADMISSIONS:

The BSc Psychology programme leader confirmed that the BSc Forensic Psychology programme had a lower entrance

admission tariff due to an ongoing trial by the School to see how recruitment faired after increasing the entrance tariff

to 280 from 240 UCAS tariff points on the BSc Psychology. They confirmed it has been agreed to increase the BSc

Forensic Psychology programme from 2015. The BSc Developmental Psychology programme is no longer recruiting.

The panel noted that the IELTs minimum was 6.0 with a minimum of 6.0 in Writing and Speaking; minimum 5.5 in

Reading and Listening (or recognised equivalent).

The programme leader confirmed that the non-traditional qualification route would include professionals working in

health professions or similar professions that the team consider give students an understanding required for a

psychology degree. The panel ascertained that there are consistent criteria used by the admissions team in the interview

process, and in addition there is a written exercise given to those who cannot demonstrate the required level of skill in

written communication in their current work. The panel asked the programme leader for the BSc Psychology to ensure

that they investigate formalising a set of questions and/or an admissions process including the written component and

any additional tests to ensure that there is transparent fairness in this process. The Subject Leader for the BSc

Psychology programme suggested that it would be a useful template to have to implement across the School. Action:

BSc Psychology programme leader to collate a standard set of questions and additional work for non-

traditional entrance interview for applicants on to these programmes.

The Chair noted that both external advisors felt that the admissions processes clearly articulated in the validation

document were both sound and fair.


4) STRUCTURE:

The panel considered the structure well defined and consistent with aims and objectives. The programme leader for the

BSc Psychology by distance learning confirmed that the new regulations allowed for students to study the programme

off-campus for a semester but that the programme was not a blended learning programme. There was an opportunity

for blended learning on the BSc Psychology programme as it did allow for on campus students to take distance learning

modules however regulations with regard to fees did not allow Distance Learning students to take on campus modules

without transferring onto the on-campus version of the programme.

The programme leader for the BSc Psychology programme explained that the decision to set the final year dissertation

module at 45 credits with a separate 15 credit employability module was due to in part to informal student feedback,

and experience of flaws in the previously validated dissertation module. Students had provided feedback that the

employability part of the dissertation module was not a good fit. There was a problem in that some students did not

submit their employability coursework by the deadline and this resulted in them failing the whole dissertation module,

with a significant impact on their degree results overall. The programme team did not want to reduce the project, as

BPS (British Psychological Society) requirements mean that this module must be more than 30 credits and did not want

to repeat the previous module of a 60 credit module with integrated employability. Similarly a 90 credit module would

put too much weighting on the project. Therefore the programme team had designed the 45 credit project alongside a

standalone 15 credit employability module which they felt was the best way to comply with BPS requirements as well

as bringing added value to the employability content. The latter 15 credit core employability module which

incorporated key skills learning outcomes would enable students to focus on the employability tasks separately

ensuring a greater standard of work and engagement.

13

The panel questioned the programme leaders regarding the amount of 15 credit options modules specifically asking the

programme teams to provide a clear rationale why the amount of 15 credit options were being validated. The

programme leaders pointed to the following rationale:

Not all the 15 credit modules would be available in a given year. It was never the programme teams intention to

run all the 15 credit modules at the same time

The programme leaders confirmed that they had agreed with the Dean that there would be three 30 credit

options and four 15 credit options across levels 5 and 6. The exhaustive list of modules was to ensure that the

programmes could utilise them if required in future.

Many students who study Psychology go onto the professional psychology route (e.g. Clinical or Counselling

Psychology). Giving these students a variety of options means they form a basic grounding in various areas of

psychology which leaves their options open for specialism when they go onto postgraduate study or specialist

vocational training.

Student feedback was that they chose to study undergraduate psychology at UEL because of the choice offered,

so removing the options would result in a drop in recruitment.

The Subject Leader for the programme confirmed that there was clear evidence that our close competitors

provided options and used a variety of option modules as a strength in recruitment. The Subject Head cautioned

this must be taken into consideration so as not to disadvantage recruitment and future income.

A practical reason for a level five 15 credit option is that there is a Work-place module that only works on a one

term basis so an additional 15 credit module was needed.

The panel asked for a separate rationale document that included student feedback to show that they had specifically

joined the programme due to the many options available to study. In addition, evidence that competitors offer a similar

range of options should be included in this rationale. Action: Programme Leaders to compile a rationale for each

15 credit module gathering evidence mentioned but not previously requested.

The panel asked about the possibility of combining topics into double 30 credit module options (such as Forensic and

Counselling). The programme leaders responded that this was not a good idea as this would mean that students might

have to study a topic that they are not interested in and potentially could encourage poor performance.

The programme leader for BSc Psychology on behalf of all the programme teams responded to the question about the

reason for placing employability where it was in the programme. She confirmed that employability was a key element

on all the programmes. From day one the programme teams focus on employability to ensure students are on the right

track regarding careers. The employability module is a summary of the skills taught in the previous 2 years.

The external advisor felt that to devote 30 credits to the thinking module and the same to Researching Psychological

Worlds 1 was a little strange. He claimed that to separate some of the important work to be encountered in the

‘Thinking’ module from the practical component does also risk a failure on the part of students to integrate.

To respond to the External Advisors comments regarding this the BSc Programme leaders confirmed that the thinking

like a psychologist’ module was designed to allow students to understand more about critical thinking and is taught

with more ‘real world’ examples rather than just psychology examples. The structure is also designed this way to

allow students who take a dual subject degree to get recognition by the BPS. For students who are taking psychology

as their first subject in a two-subject degree, this is the module that would be replaced by a level 4 module from another

14

subject area. Meanwhile these students do take all the other core psychology modules which deliver the psychology

content required by the BPS.

To respond to the External Advisors comments about lack of distinction for the BSc Developmental Psychology, the

BSc Psychology programme leader confirmed that there was an error on the validation document where it was not

made clear that the Developmental Psychology programme was being replaced by a new two-subject programme

called Child Psychology. Current students would take a new Developmental Psychology module at level 6 and would

cover all the content of the current Developmental programme.

In response to External Advisors’ comments in the response document the programme leader for Developmental

Psychology programme confirmed that all programmes followed UEL’s policy on placements. On the two placement

modules (one at level 5, one at level 6), students are expected to find a suitable placement to fit their studies, whether

that is in a school, business or as a volunteer. Once done, the placement is formalised by the module leader providing a

proforma that is completed by the placement provider agreeing that the student will be supervised and that they can

provide 30 hours of work. The form covers H&S and insurance and it is important to emphasise that the placement

provider does not assess the student. The placement opportunities are used by the student to strengthen their CV and to

gain experience that the student can use to refer to and illustrate their academic work- it is not training.

The Chair draw the panel’s attention to the comments in the response document commending the ‘introduction of a

framing device in which the Introduction to core modules flags up how approaches used will integrate and enhance

each other and the final overview session which promotes synthesis - and even antithesis where appropriate.’ In

addition, the external advisors comments were flagged up confirming that there is a clearly defined structure for the

programme with information provided on progression and transitional arrangements in place for students with a

shortfall of credits.


5) CONTENT:

The panel noted that the content was consistent with the aims and objectives of the programmes and external

benchmarks have been used explicitly and extensively, including QA benchmarks on the subject itself and on

placement learning. Mapping of the UEL skills curriculum is exemplary; it is both comprehensive and thoughtful.

The panel asked the programme leader to add to the module Researching Psychological Worlds 2 reading list relating

to employability that would cover learning outcomes 14 to 17. Action: PL to ensure reading list is updated.

The panel noted that the external advisors’ comments regarding the extent of students’ practical work, the

Developmental Psychology programme and the integrity of assessment for distance learning had been addressed

already in responses to other comments. . A further query regarding the narrow focus of some modules whilst other

modules have a broader focus was responded to by the BSc Psychology programme leaders confirming that the narrow

focus of some of the level 6 modules is intentional so that students can go much deeper into the areas that they are most

interested in, rather than covering a more broader approach. Those students who do not wish to do the more narrow

focused modules will opt for the more expansive modules.


6) LEARNING AND TEACHING METHODS:

The panel noted the wide range of learning and teaching methods used. The Chair noted the concerns of the external

advisor that the methods are wide-ranging and often imaginative for the on-campus students. Some of these may be far

less effective for the DL programme, so disadvantaging distance learning students by omission. The programme leader

15

for the BSc Psychology programme by distance learning confirmed that the DL programme has been running well at

UEL and one of the things that we have tried hard to do is to treat the DL students in the same way as on-campus

students as far as is possible. They have (and will continue to do so) set up discussion forums which we encourage on-

campus students to engage with as well as DL students. This helps them to feel part of the community and they can

raise ideas and opinions with other psychology students.

The aim of the programme is to give the distance learning students the exact same experience as on-campus students in

every practical way.

The BSc Psychology programme leader responded on behalf of the programme teams to the concern that the Research

Conference Module was redundant and should be folded into the dissertation module. The programme team had

offered this as an option because it was not relevant to all students. 80% of Psychology students go on to do something

else rather than psychology and therefore training for conferences would not be something that they would be

interested in doing or would need to do The conference module is also difficult to design (at present) for DL students.

The Associate Dean for the School of Psychology requested that it should be clear on each module specification and in

the programme specification that formative assessment is a teaching method that does not contribute to or necessarily

predict the grade of the final summative assessment. To avoid confusion, a set of wording which is explicit, and

clarifies formative assessment with regard to the learning and teaching experience should be included on both Module

and Programme specifications, in the following format ‘formative assessment will allow students to monitor their own

understanding and teaching staff to monitor understanding and engagement at that point in the student’s learning.’

Action: Programme Leaders to add this phrase to both module specifications and programme specifications

before paperwork is submitted for final approval.


7) ASSESSMENT:

The panel acknowledged the range of innovative assessment methods that are offered on all these programmes. The

BSc Psychology by distance learning programme confirmed that the DL students will be treated in exactly the same

way as the on-campus students in terms of highlighting the methods of assessments that are going to be used on the

module. Where possible all assessments will be the same for DL students as for on-campus students and where this

differs, it will be made very clear in the module handbooks, and on the Moodle module site. One of the only

differences between distance and on campus students may be timetabling as on-campus students may have exams on

different days and distance learning students all on the same day due to travel constraints. It is suggested that the

option could be given to students based in London to attend the on-campus exams rather than just the dates given to

distance learning students outside London. The programme leader felt that the fact that the same exam could be sat on

different days did not compromise the integrity of the assessment as exams are seen essay questions and for MCQ’s it

is not expected that students are able to memorise the question paper to communicate with fellow students.

The Chair brought the panel’s attention to the positive feedback from the QAE Representative-namely that the good

range of assessment methods all complied with the new assessment tariff. Other panel members confirmed that the

imaginative assessments will help students develop transferable skills in applying their knowledge to real world

problems. In addition, the external advisors commented on the commitment to formative assessment and the

challenging and stimulating methods for students to demonstrate the learning outcomes.

The Student Representative noted that on level 5, students would be sitting 5 to 7 major exams which are only worth

20% of their final degree marks and this might lead to stress and apathy. The Chair pointed to the additional revision

period which would now support students in the new framework, and formative assessment with feedback would lead

them to be that much better prepared. The Programme leaders felt that students would obviously have more time to

develop an understanding of the material with this new framework and therefore would be much more confident in

facing exams.


16

8) GUIDANCE AND SUPPORT:

The Chair noted that questions raised such as students support on placement, distance learning students allocation of a

personal tutor (the same as on-campus) had been answered. In general the panel were happy that the provision and

entitlement was set out clearly in the documentation provided, showing that good levels of support were available with

an emphasis on improving student experience.

The Chair noted the external advisors comments that the level of support given to students was commendable: in

particular the use of Moodle, but raised concerns about transferring personal tutor duties to the project supervisor in the

final year. The Programme Leader for the BSc Psychology programme confirmed on behalf of all programmes that this

practice had been happening for a number of years and the project supervisor was excellently placed to carry out this

role, developing very close ties with the student and being able to offer important support.

The panel noted that the external advisors concerns about commitments to offering equivalent personal tutor support to

distance learning had been addressed by changing wording to the module specifications and in the validation document

to represent the current support levels provided.

The BSc Psychology programme leader noted the external advisors comments/concerns about instigating a more

proactive approach for personal tutoring at levels 4 and 5 for those who do not engage. She confirmed that there is a

personal tutoring scheme being planned taking these issues into consideration. It is expected that the change will be that

the personal tutor will be expected to take a lead into chasing up attendance and meetings etc.


9) PROGRESSION AND COMPLETION:

The panel agreed that the Progression and completion rates have been clearly considered and clearly described. The

Chair noted positive comments about good practice around the framing device to be used at the start and end of the

core modules. Such framing should help to promote student learning and therefore should support progression.


10) INFORMATION:

The Chair noted minor typos and template issues that required addressing in the final paperwork and asked that the

paperwork be smoothed before submitting to Quality Administrator for submission to VRSC for final institutional

approval. Action: All Programme Leaders to check and amend the programme specifications and address any

errors.

The panel noted that all other typos and amendments had been made and were happy with the final set of paperwork.

To answer the external advisors comments about expecting more practical exercises, specifically in the ‘Researching

Psychological Words’ and ‘Thinking like a Psychologist’ modules, the BSc Psychology Programme Leader confirmed

that on the ‘Thinking like a Psychologist module’ students were left a choice as to how to complete a component

whether it be by PowerPoint, blogs, posters, essays or physical displays. In the ‘Researching Psychological Words 1’

module students have two hours of practical sessions each week.


17

11) STUDENTS’ AND EMPLOYERS’ VIEWS:

The BSc Psychology programme leader confirmed that they have contacted a handful of employers to acquire

feedback. . The Associate Dean confirmed that the development of the new employability learning outcomes included

consultation with employers and would supply this information to the Quality Leader. Action: Programme Leader to

provide contact from the employers prior to submission for final approval. Action: Associate Dean to supply

employers’ feedback on the programme to Quality Leader.

The panel noted that students had been consulted and other issues had already been addressed at other points during

this panel. It was noted that the external advisors remarked that there should have been greater consultation with

students. However it was pointed out that students were widely consulted prior to the University implementing

changes to the Academic Framework via a big online consultation over last summer.


12) REGULATIONS OF VALIDATING BODIES

The programme is aligning with the BPS requirements. The BSc Psychology Programme Leader noted that students on

the new programme would be better prepared to face their project, with the introduction of Psychological worlds 1 and

2 modules when in the previous programme there was a gap of a term between a research methods module and the

project. The Subject Head for the programmes confirmed that the BPS audit the School to ensure we have the correct

resources both physical i.e. lecturers and practical i.e. rooms/labs via a resource review.


13) OTHER ISSUES

There were no other issues outstanding not already raised in previous items.

The panel approved this section.

The Chair noted that the external advisors written approval had been received and noted that the panel and SPQSC

granted unconditional approval for the Re-validation of the BSc (Hons.) Psychology, BSc (Hons.) Forensic

Psychology, BSc (Hons.) Developmental Psychology and BSc (Hons.) Psychology by distance learning programmes.

The Chair noted the comments from Mitch Waterman in particular and read these out in full:

I read the very detailed response (commendable level of detail) last week, and certainly my two major concerns

(integrity in the DL, distinctiveness in the Developmental) have been addressed entirely satisfactorily, so I’m now

happy to confirm that those two should be approved.

Of the minor issues, only one I think remained a problem – and that was associated with narrow modules and the

problems that almost inevitably flow from such. This is not a barrier to approval though, and the response (perhaps

from Amanda?) was as I might have expected. Frankly, I think degree programmes right across the country suffer

similar problems – usually as a function of allowing/encouraging particularly new colleagues to offer research-based

modules in the final year. Sometimes those are painfully narrow, and sometimes more general, which might be better

suited to final year of a first degree. I don’t know of any programme team which has got the balance quite right, nor

indeed, the process necessarily to address it.

As I say, not a barrier, so happy to confirm that I feel all four should be approved.

18

The Associate Dean of the School of Psychology and on behalf of the Dean wanted to recognise the huge amount of

work that has been carried out by the programme team, and the Quality Committee and expressed the thanks of herself

and the Dean for all the hard work.

The Chair followed the panel members in commending and congratulating the programme teams, considering the

complexities of the exercise, for the quality and high standard of the paperwork provided while noting that the work of

these teams underpin all the other undergraduate programmes within the School.

11. REVIEW & ENHANCEMENT PROCESS


11.1.1 CMSC Audit of Review And Enhancement Process Collaborations

The committee received the audit of the REP of the collaborative programmes noting that the AKMI responses had

been returned due to lack of comparative analysis. The Schools Lead on the collaboration with AKMI confirmed that

he had with the support of the School Senior Administrator put together an additional narrative including a traffic light

system and would be sending this on to CMSC. This information would include that it had been sent on to colleagues

in AKMI who had confirmed that MIP action plans had been put in place for all modules that were flagged as either

amber or red. In addition, he wished to note that the quality of the REPs provided by AKMI were competent and of a

high standard which was confirmed by the Chair and by the academic link tutor on the committee. Action: DR to

forward on the updated comparative analysis to CMSC.

The School’s Leader in Collaborative Provision confirmed that many partnership REPs had been referred for the same

reason and in general there has been a large jump in REPs that have been returned this year.

11.1.2 AKMI Campus REP decision

The School Leader for Collaborative Provision was able to confirm that a formal response from CMSC confirming that

AKMI would be advised to create one REP for each programme but include comparative analysis between different

AKMI campuses was likely soon.

12. MIPs (MODULE IMPROVEMENT PLANS)


12.1.1 MIP for Psychological Interventions Subject Area

The committee noted that the MIP for Psychological Interventions subject area was complete. The QAE representative

confirmed that Subject Area Leaders would have to respond to MIP’s, even those that were being revalidated by

confirming how the new modules were going to make a difference and improve the areas of the poorly performing

module. The committee noted that this would be an easier task for programmes that were being repackaged but all the

undergraduate programmes and modules within the School were being re-validated so no mapping document was

created to easily follow progress of any action. The committee considered that unless the module was being run as a

transition module then the response to MIP action plans would be that the module had been revalidated. Action:

Subject Leaders to check circulated MIP table to confirm which modules were being run as transition modules

and provide action plans. Action: QL to create a joint response on behalf of School confirming the revalidation

process has been the action to resolve other outstanding issues.

19

13. EXTERNAL COLLABORATIVE PARTNERS

13.1. RECEIVED & NOTED

13.1.1 To receive requirements for re-approval of franchised programmes in line with New Academic

Framework

The School’s Lead on the AKMI partnership confirmed that AKMI had responded very positively to the proposal

requiring re-validation by November 2014. AKMI do not run a February start for the BSc Psychology so this aspect of

the framework changes would not be an issue. He confirmed that it was likely that this would come to SQSC after July

2014. The QAE Representative had to confirm what actual documentation that would be required. It was likely to be

that AKMI would provide written confirmation of their commitment to run the new programme, alongside providing a

resource outline which might require a site visit from the School as QAE was not planning on carrying out systematic

site visits. There was a suggestion that due to the developing partnership that AKMI might want to accredit the BSc

Psychology programme so a proposal to teach the BSc in English might come to the committee. Action: QAE

Representative to provide clarity on the paperwork required for revalidation for franchised programmes

process.

14. VALIDATION REVIEW SUB-COMMITTEE

14.1 NONE

15. QUALITY STANDING COMMITTEE

15.1 RECEVIED & NOTED

15.1.1 Academic Framework Change Update

The committee noted that the email regarding including formative assessment was being implemented and that

Transition Group were working very hard. All other issues had been discussed in other items.

15.1.2 Action Plan from the External Examiner Overview Report 2012/13

The Chair noted that the issue about how online second marking is given to external examiners was discussed at the

most recent External Examiners Subcommittee meeting. The committee considered the best practice for this in the

School. Module leaders should supply a table to the external examiners showing those that have been second marked.

External examiners would then be able to view all the scripts on-line and would know which had been moderated. This

would be more practical than printing off hard copies of moderated work and sending the scripts in the post which was

seen as defeating the positive aspects of this online process. Such a process is also more open as External Examiners

have access to the entire cohort if they want to see other papers.

The School’s leader in collaborative provision confirmed that staff development for collaborative partners in relation to

feedback is ongoing.

15.1.3 15.1.3 BPS & HCPC Conditions of Accreditation Prof Doc Occupational Psychology

The committee noted no change to this item.

16. PROFESSIONAL BODY ACCREDITATION


16.1.1 SoP PSRB accreditations monitoring table

20

The committee noted no change to this item.

17. AOB


17.1.1 Proforma for University of East London Student Handbooks

The Chair tabled a paper outlining the recent Research concordat which included information that should be included

in all undergraduate and postgraduate programme handbooks. Such information will be included alongside the BPS

code of conduct currently required for accredited programmes. It had been confirmed with the School Leader in

Teaching and Learning but Subject Area Leaders would need to ensure that this is carried out. Action: Quality Leader

to send document to School.

18. DATES OF FUTURE MEETINGS

18.1 NOTED

SPQSC Wednesday 24th April 2014 at 11am – 5 pm Room RB.G.13

SPQSC Wednesday 14th May 2014 2pm-5pm Room AE.2.06

Action Sheet – SPQSC Wednesday 19th January 2014

UNCONFIRMED

CONFIRMED X

Minute

Item

Action

by Complete:

3.1.1 To amend and forward on minutes to QAE. WM

4.1.1 To submit suspension of programme form for MAP to SPQSC. DR

4.1.1 To confirm what issue requires a response from the Director of Student

Life WM

4.1.1 To update table of conditions with programme leader of Prof Doc

Occupational Psychology AR

5.1.2 To send outstanding responses to external examiners annual reports. DR

5.1.2 To check if Peter Elliott’s response has been completed. WM

5.1.5 To complete EE nomination form and name a mentor PD

5.1.5-10 To get forms signed and sent to QAE for approval. WM

9.1.1 To confirm approval of module specification and for module team to

check reading list. AR

9.1.1 To ensure module specification is updated on Delta. WM

10.1.1 To update timetable and circulate AR

10.1.2 To update SoP approvals table and circulate at next SPQSC. WM

10.1.3 To ensure all actions are carried out and approved programme is

submitted to VRSC AR

10.1.4 To ensure all actions are carried out and approved programme is

submitted to VRSC AR

11.1.1 To forward on comparative analysis required for approval of AKMI REP. DR

12.1.1 To check MIP table for modules that will be run as transition modules and

provide action plans.

Subject

Leaders

12.1.1 To provide response to MIP for modules being revalidated. AR

13.1.1 To provide clarity on the paperwork required for revalidation for

franchised programmes process. NU

17.1.1 To circulate proforma for Research Modules in Programme Handbooks AR

UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON · Roger Carpenter (School of Health, Sport and Bioscience) Fahima Miah...

Documents

Transcript of UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON · Roger Carpenter (School of Health, Sport and Bioscience) Fahima Miah...