In attendance: UG2, UG4/5, MSc reps, Alison Downie, Paul Anderson, Bjoern Franke
INF2B is generally fine, but students complained about the mismatch of time required for the coursework and the coursework weight. Bjoern explained that time and weight are not related, but it’s the coverage of learning outcomes that determines the coursework weight. Some material and some learning outcomes are best learned and assessed in practical work, which often takes proportionally more time. Yet, if e.g. only one of five learning outcomes is assessed in a piece of coursework then it typically attracts around 20% weight, even though it may take up more than 20% of the time for that course. This acknowledges that learning outcomes and the time it takes to achieve those learning outcomes are not necessarily correlated and weighting credit by time rather than achievement would skew assessment unfavourably.
There have been concerns about the INF2D coursework marks. Some submissions have been re-evaluated due to mistakes. In a meeting with the year organiser the lecturer agreed to provide individual feedback such that students would be able to check where they lost marks and seek clarification if required. Up to this point this feedback has not yet been provided by the lecturer.
Apparently, contradictory information was provided, i.e. information confirmed by the TA was not what was considered at the time of marking. There is also some amount of inconsistency between marks obtained for similar submissions.
The students suggested that the INF2D exam paper should be carefully scrutinised to avoid ambiguities and confusion. Bjoern explained the School’s exam scrutiny process, where each exam paper is scrutinised by two members of staff. Additionally, the year organiser and Convener of the Exam Board are involved in this process, and exam papers are also scrutinised by an External Examiner. Details of the process can be found here:
AILP marks and feedback have now been returned.
ALE1 marks have not yet been returned and are now overdue.
The IRP deadline has been moved by one day due to contradictory information on two different web pages, one of which the course organiser wasn’t aware.
There are no past papers available for IMC. Could the sample paper considered at BoS for course approval be made available?
There have been clusters of deadlines around the end of the semester. Whilst this is unavoidable to some degree and due to the short lengths of the semesters, this was subsequently discussed at Teaching Committee. We will investigate the provision of a coursework calendar such that students, lecturers and year organisers can get a better overview of deadlines and hopefully avoid setting deadlines to conflict with too many others.
It was reported that some students take food and drink into the computer labs and leave behind a mess. Whilst cleaners are regularly cleaning the labs it is ultimately the students’ responsibility to stick to the rules and keep facilities clean. Computing officers directly approach students found violating the rules, but students are also encouraged to remind fellow students to *not* leave behind machines in an unusable state due to food and drink “contamination”.
Students have asked about an update on Appleton Tower, especially when space would become available for MSc students over the summer.