1 / 15

LTSN Workshop Benchmarking and the New Review Process University of York, 11/9/01

LTSN Workshop Benchmarking and the New Review Process University of York, 11/9/01. Agriculture, Forestry, Agricultural and Food Sciences. Martin Luck. School of Biosciences, University of Nottingham. Aims. To review progress in benchmarking AFA&FS To discuss key issues

natasha-delis
Download Presentation

LTSN Workshop Benchmarking and the New Review Process University of York, 11/9/01

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LTSN Workshop Benchmarking and the New Review Process University of York, 11/9/01 Agriculture, Forestry, Agricultural and Food Sciences Martin Luck School of Biosciences, University of Nottingham

  2. Aims • To review progress in benchmarking AFA&FS • To discuss key issues • To feed your views back to the Benchmarking Team • To finish in time for tea

  3. Session format • Introductions • Overview of Benchmarking Team’s work • Group activity • Group feedback and general discussion • Round up and way forward

  4. The benchmarking process:Targets Dearing (1997) NCIHE “….standards should be developed by the academic community itself through formal groupings for the main areas of study.” The Quality Assurance Agency “….should work with institutions to develop small, expert teams to provide benchmark information on standards”

  5. The benchmarking process:Targets To make explicit “the nature and standards of awards” within the subject area Mike Laugharne, QAA, Benchmarking Project Manager

  6. The benchmarking timetable Sept 2000: Establishment of Team Sept 2000 – June 2001: Four drafting meetings July 2001 – Nov 2001: Consultation Jan 2002: Final redrafting Mar 2002: Publication

  7. The Benchmarking Team: Institutions Liverpool John Moores University Harper Adams University College University of Nottingham (2) University of Reading (2) Royal Agricultural College Scottish Agricultural College University of Aberdeen University of Dundee University of Ulster Queen’s University Belfast University of Wales (2) University of Wales, Institute of Rural Studies (2)

  8. The Benchmarking Team: Home departments Applied Sciences Biosciences Agriculture Agriculture and Forest Sciences Agriculture & Forestry Agricultural Botany Agriculture & Food Sciences Food Sciences Food Science & Technology Technology Rural Studies Leisure & Tourism Management & Consumer Studies

  9. The Benchmarking Team:What have we been discussing? • Graduates in AFA&FS are • Diverse • Adaptable • Not vocationally limited • Therefore • Define course content flexibly • Define thresholds generically

  10. Group name… …applied biology…science…technology…environment… …rural business...consumer sciences …land/countryside… The Benchmarking Team:What have we been discussing? Need to encompass: • Agriculture (science, food, fibre, horticulture) • Food (science, technology, microbiology) • The working, living and consuming environment • Countryside industries • Forestry • Companion animals • Leisure (consumer sciences, management, golf courses)

  11. Subject-related sub-groups Group outcome The group The Benchmarking Team:What have we been discussing? Easy.... Not easy....

  12. Are we all applied biologists? Inclusive forms of language Are we all scientists? What about Leisure & Tourism What about horses? The Benchmarking Team:What have we been discussing?

  13. Issues for consultation • Nature of subject area • Attributes and capabilities of graduates • Levels of detail, definition and prescription of course content • Ways of using benchmarking statements • Overlap with other benchmarking areas • Where is the process leading? What effect will it have on HE?

  14. Group activity Topics for discussion The remit of the AFAFS benchmarking statement Is it cohesive? Is it broad enough/too broad? Are all the included areas really “science”? Will your teaching fit easily within it? Will you need to use other benchmarking statements? The content of the AFAFS benchmarking statement Should our graduates be defined by skill/knowledge? What experience of research should they have? How should we define levels of achievement? What approach should we take to uniformity?

  15. Contact Dr Martin Luck Senior Lecturer in Animal Physiology University of Nottingham School of Biosciences Sutton Bonington Campus Loughborough LE12 5RD Tel 0115 9516309 Fax 0115 9516302 Martin.Luck@nottingham.ac.uk

More Related