In attendance: Bjoern Franke (Director of Teaching), Christophe Dubach (UG3 Course Organiser), Paul Jackson (MSc Course Organiser), Jennifer Oxley (Computing Support)
Bjoern said that the some of the 10-credit point courses are soon coming to an end of their
No Reps in attendance.
No Reps in attendance but the UG2 Staff Student Liaison was held in the morning.
No Reps in attendance.
AGTA the last coursework is due on the same day at the 4th year Project hand-in, Bjoern will talk to Kousha Etessami the lecturer.
ALE coursework 2 was 5 days late in being realised and the coursework is the same as last year, it hasn’t been updated. Bjoern will talk with the lecturer Helen Pain.
CN coursework 2 is quite overloaded with having 4 literature papers to read, the students feel it could be a bit more refined.
MLP deadlines was extended as there was an authentication error and the students didn’t have access to the cluster, so it made sense for the deadline to be extended. It was asked about the impact these deadline changes have on part-time students, Bjoern will look into this.
It was also asked about the late submission policy, at the moment these guidelines are set by College but each School has wiggle room in their own policies. Teaching Committee will discuss our current 0 mark for any late submissions, but the School is looking at ways to define “substantial parts of assessment” for which a 5% deduction per day of being late can be applied.
PM and CQI are very good.
It was asked if IRP tutorial attendance is mandatory, Bjoern will also look into this.
RC was discussed off-line with the lecturer.
The students are not happy when they collect their coursework from ITO, as some lecturers require the students to put their names on the front and other students are able to see their marks, Bjoern will look into this.
It was also asked if students were able to find out where in the ranking do they fall in the coursework marks being returned. The School deliberately does not provide this information for (at least) two reasons: (a) It does not support or enhance the students’ learning, and (b) it potentially increases pressure on vulnerable students, e.g. suffering from anxiety or other mental health issues, which could be exacerbated through continued comparative information related to one’s individual academic standing with respect to the overall student cohort.