RAVENSBOURNE
STUDENT LIAISON COMMITTEE FOR PRODUCTION COURSES
Minutes of the meeting held at 1230 on Thursday 24th October
2013 in Room 209-10
14.01 WELCOME
Present:
Lizzie Jackson
Janthia Taylor
John O’Boyle
Rachel Green
Will Pearson
Steve Sadler
Martyn Gates
Freddie Gaffney
Jeremy Barr
Howard Austin
Lily Li
Paul Jeffery
Cindy Ward
Dan Regan
Ryan Hurt
Matt Luew
Daisy Edwards
Jay Salomon
Mhairi Whyles Lang
Harry Matthewson
Harleigh Reid
Mdhamiri A-Nkemi
Benjamin Rozario
Jamie Graham
Nicola Clyde
Academic Development Manager, Applied
Research and Development (Chair)
Deputy Director, Strategic and Academic
Development and Postgraduate Studies
Director of Academic Services
Director of Operations
Director of Technology
Subject Leader, DTV and BOP
Assoc Senior Lecturer BTC
Subject Leader, DFP
Sessional Lecturer, Contextual Studies
Senior Media Services Engineer
RSU President
Quality Officer (Secretary)
Broadcast Operations and Production 3
Broadcast Technology 1
Broadcast Technology 2
Broadcast Technology 3
Digital Film Production 1
Digital Film Production 2
Digital Film Production 2
Digital Film Production 3
Editing and Post Production 1
Editing and Post Production 1
Editing and Post Production 2
Digital Television Production 1
Digital Television Production 1
14.02 NOTES FROM THE MEETING
Noted:
Notes from the meeting held on 2 May 2013 are available on the
intranet here.
14.03 OUTSTANDING ITEMS
Noted:
Quality Team
The Chair and Director of Technology updated the meeting on MAM
developments. It is operating satisfactorily at present, but plans were
in progress to upgrade the old software currently in use to a new
version that would be close to the industry standard, rather than the
current educational model. Fork storage and management of content
is in operation, however. Responses on queries about the system will
be made to requests through JIRA. It was added that the a Product
Technology Group of academic and IT staff meets every month and
students can raise issues with their Subject Leader for discussion at
the Group’s meetings. It was also reported that A part-time manager
First Circulation
for the MAM was to be recruited.
The Director of Operations described the new CLR software now in
operation which allowed students to make online bookings form
outside the institution. As would be expected, there are some early
operational problems with the system which are receiving attention.
Workshops were being scheduled for students on the use of the new
system; details would be displayed on the Mininet. The new system
represented a significant improvement of the previous service, but
student feedback would be needed to help develop it to maximum
advantage.
14.04 STRUCTURE AND TERMS OF REFERENCE
To consider:
A proposal for course-based Student Liaison Committees
The proposal for course-based SLCs, with student representatives
meeting for each subject meeting with their Subject Leader, was
explained. The SLCs would still report to the Board of Studies for the
Production cluster, which would consider any issues not resolved at
course level. Issues raised at SLCs which are of institution-wide
significance can be referred to the Student Parliament. A mix of views
was expressed on the proposal and it was felt that both approaches
had merits.
Noted:
The revised terms of reference for Student Liaison Committees
14.05 EXTERNAL EXAMINER’S REPORTS
Noted:
External examiners reports on Production courses can be found here.
The purposes and operation of the external examiner system were
explained. The 2013 reports were good, with the standards of
learning and assessment confirmed as being in line with expectations
for all institutions. Good practice and issues for improvement would
be addressed in an action plan for each course. Referencing
dissertations and assessment feedback were among the examples
noted.
14.06 ANNUAL COURSE MONITORING (ACM) REPORTS
Noted:
Reports on the academic year 2012-13 are in preparation and the
issues raised would be incorporated in action plans. The Board of
Studies would monitor progress on the action plans each term. The
ACM reports from previous years can be seen here.
The Chair described how the leaders of all courses shared and
discussed their ACM reports in an annual ACM Plenary meeting,
which provided valuable feedback and sharing of experience.
14.07 VALIDATION TRANSFER.
Received:
Quality Team
The Director of Academic Services on the progress reported on the
process of transferring from City University to the University of the
Arts London as the validating (degree awarding) partner for
Ravensbourne. Level 3 Broadcast Technology was an exception,
however, as students had expressed the wish to remain on their
First Circulation
existing programme and receive degrees awarded by City University
at the end of 2013-14. Students would receive details on the new
academic regulations soon, when they were finalised. The changes
were marginal and the principle that there should to be no detriment
to students from the transfer would be observed. Although no
extensions to deadlines for the submission of work were allowed
under UAL, an Extenuating Circumstances Panel could allow further
submissions to be made where supporting evidence was provided,
and the Panel judged that the circumstances had affected
performance.
It was also stressed that UAL courses should not be confused with
Ravensbourne courses. The university validated Ravensbourne
courses for the award of UAL degrees, but UAL courses were not
Ravensbourne courses, even though they may have similar or the
same titles. So rumours suggesting that dissertation word-limits
would change in line with UAL courses were simply wrong.
14.08 STUDENT SATISFACTION SURVEYS
Noted:
The importance of the internal and external surveys was explained.
The internal survey (Course Experience Questionnaire - CEQ) was
for all students and the external (National Student Survey - NSS) was
for final year students only. The results of the surveys, which were
vital for improving and developing courses, were analysed closely
and reports were considered by the Academic Board and other
committees. They also inform Subject Leaders’ ACM reports. The
2013 results showed marked differences between the CEQ which
showed high levels of satisfaction, and the NSS which indicated
much lower levels. Work was in progress to redevelop internal survey
methods and to review student feedback systems overall, in order to
support improvements in satisfaction levels as measured by the NSS.
14.09 REPORTS FROM STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES
Discussed:
1) Student representatives raised issues regarding:





The adequacy of the supply of lenses in CLR
Maintenance of CLR equipment
Timetabling information and changes
The Level 1 Communication and Visualisaton unit
Level 1 induction trail
2) Staff responses
The Director of Operations said that the CLR system provided data
on equipment in high demand and short supply. New equipment was
added at the start of this year, but the possibility that more lenses
were needed would be considered. On maintenance, CLR staff were
expected to check the condition of returned equipment; it may be
necessary to consider whether staffing levels are sufficient to ensure
this is done consistently. The system allowed for a turn-round of 30
minutes between return and re-issue of the same equipment. It was
recognised that the system might require development to ensure that
it is properly manageable, and work was in progress to that effect. In
Quality Team
First Circulation
the meantime checking the condition of equipment before re-issue
would be tightened.
The Director of Academic Services explained that staffing difficulties
on timetabling had led to a number of problems this term and he
apologised to student representatives. Subject Leaders would receive
timetables for next term for checking soon, and students will receive
them well in advance of the start of next term. He assured
representatives that every effort was being made to stabilise the
system, which would be much improved next term.
The Chair thanked representatives for their feedback on the
Communication and Visualisaton unit, which would be subject to
review. The use of lectures, large group sessions in general and
other types of group-work was also receiving attention. Issues on the
teaching in specific sessions should be raised as soon as possible
with the Subject Leader concerned.
Appreciation was again expressed for feedback on the Induction
Trail, which was used for the first time this term. It was agreed that
the right balance between an interactive and collaborative process
and basic guidance and information must be achieved. The
comments made, which also highlighted the different needs of
students with different learning styles, would be included in the
review of the induction trail method.
14.10 BOARD OF STUDIES REPRESENTATION
Noted:
The importance of student representation on the Board of Studies,
which discussed all matters related to the development and
improvement of Production courses, was explained. This included the
issues raised at the Student Liaison Committee, to ensure that
appropriate action was taken in response to student feedback. The
Board was chaired by the Academic Development Manager for
Production. Representatives from Broadcast Technology, Editing and
Post Production and Digital Film Production volunteered to represent
students at the Board of Studies.
14.11 DATES FOR FUTURE MEETINGS
The next round of meetings will take place during the week commencing
3rd February 2014
Quality Team
First Circulation