120 likes | 197 Views
Regulation and Credit Framework for the Conferment of Awards. Quality and Standards Office. Regulation and Credit Framework for the Conferment of Awards.
E N D
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 University’s 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 (para5.15), and • a scale of marks for modules at level 7 is adopted (paras5.17-5.19) • 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 (paras5.7-5.9)
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 Master’s Degree can be awarded with Distinction or with Merit (paras7.15, 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 (paras7.15 (ii) and 7.16 (ii)); • additional rules about how students with advanced standing shall be treated for the purposes of classification (paras7.20 and 7.22); • new rules on the award of University Diplomas for 60 credits at levels 4, 5 or 6 be adopted (para7.49).
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 (para9.11).
Affiliate Examiners • current regulation 16.23 (‘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 (para18.5)
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) (para17.7);
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 (paras19.3 (ii) and 19.4 (i))