Presentation on theme: "Regulation and Credit Framework for the Conferment of Awards Quality and Standards Office."— Presentation transcript:
Regulation and Credit Framework for the Conferment of Awards Quality and Standards Office
Regulation and Credit Framework for the Conferment of Awards Regulatory material from the UAF and PAF is now incorporated with the Regulations for the Conferment of Awards into a Regulation and Credit Framework for the Conferment of Awards Taken together with the Research Degrees Academic Framework and the Postgraduate Initial Teacher Education Framework, this will the form the govern all University Awards from 1 September 2013 Approved protocols and conventions remain in place. There is no intention that existing programmes should revalidate or modify solely to achieve compliance with this document
New sections added Of particular note are: Section 5: Modules and Credit Section 6: Pathways and Programmes Section 7: Awards Section 8: Compensation within Undergraduate programmes The following slides indicate major changes to the Universitys existing rules
Section 5: Changes to the regulations on modules Sets out the University regulations on modules. Specific changes are: Clarification that modules are classified at level 7 (para 5.15), and a scale of marks for modules at level 7 is adopted (paras ) the extended module at level 7 will now be known as an dissertation or extended module (para 5.6) In future there will be no requirement that no marks be returned to Registry or to a Board of Examiners for modules at level 7 new rules for the operation of Negotiated modules are also included (paras )
Section 6: Pathways and programmes Establishes that named pathways must be supported by: a differentiated award title differentiated intended learning outcomes a minimum of 40 credits at the level of the target award.
Section 7: Awards Sets out the awards that may be made, the requirements that students must meet to qualify for the award, and the arrangements for classifying that award. Specific changes include: the number of re-sits and resubmissions will no longer be taken into account in determining whether a PG Dip or a Masters Degree can be awarded with Distinction or with Merit (paras 7.15, 7.16, 7.19 and 7.21); where a PG Dip or Masters Degree is awarded with Distinction or with Merit for Distinction/Merit achieved in 60 credits all those 60 credits must be at the final stage of the programme (paras 7.15 (ii) and 7.16 (ii)); additional rules about how students with advanced standing shall be treated for the purposes of classification (paras 7.20 and 7.22); new rules on the award of University Diplomas for 60 credits at levels 4, 5 or 6 be adopted (para 7.49).
Section 8: Compensation within undergraduate programmes Guidance on the use of compensation formerly in the UAF is adopted as regulation for undergraduate programmes, but no substantive changes have been made Schemes/programmes may adopt different rules on compensation, or preclude it altogether, for professional body reasons, but need approval to do so.
Section 9: Accreditation of Prior Learning The Section on APL remains the same, although two changes have been made: 10-credit modules may now be considered for APL; It has been clarified that marks may not be imported as a result of advanced standing, unless protocols are approved approved to determine how such marks will contribute to any degree classification (para 9.11).
Affiliate Examiners current regulation (A member of staff who has Affiliate Examiner Status may not normally act as the sole examiner of any work that contributes to more than 20% of the marks awarded.) has been withdrawn. Affiliate Examiners will still need to be subject to appropriate supervision, second or double marking and, where relevant, moderation.
Recommendations notwithstanding the Regulations This chapter remains substantially the same: Boards of Examiners still have no discretion to recommend progression or award for students who do not qualify, outside of recommendations made Notwithstanding the Regulations. Where recommendations are made Notwithstanding the Regulations, it is the Academic Board that exercises discretion, not the Board of Examiners (paras 16.2 and 16.3) Each recommendation Notwithstanding the Regulations is subject to separate reporting to the Academic Board (para 18.5)
Re-sit regulations a minor change to the re-sit regulations to cover the marks to be applied should a student gain the pass mark for a module, but fail to pass one or more elements of assessment must be passed (a hurdle or hurdles) (para 17.7);
Academic and Fitness to practice or professional suitability appeals This section is substantially the same, although a minor change has been approved: Those considering appeals may now exercise judgement in deciding whether to allow an appeal where a student was too ill submit extenuating circumstances evidence within the time limit set by the Academic Board (paras 19.3 (ii) and 19.4 (i))