Academic review of UK higher education
Introduction
A Subject provision and overall aims
B Academic standards Intended learning outcomes
Intended learning outcomes
Curricula
Assessment
Student achievementC Quality of learning opportunities
Teaching and learning
Student progression
Learning resourcesD Maintenance and enhancement of quality and standards
Summary of the main reviewoutcomes
Subject provision and the overall aims
The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (the QAA) helps to provide public assurance that the quality and standards of higher education are being safeguarded and enhanced by conducting academic reviews of higher education provision.
In developing its method for academic review, the QAA has published a wide range of materials designed to provide a background against which the reviews can take place. These are:
The QAA carries out reviews of individual subjects through service level agreements with the main higher education funding bodies. It also carries out institutional reviews of higher education institutions. The judgements made by the subject reviewers can contribute substantially to institutional review.
Subject review is a peer review process. It starts when institutions evaluate their provision in a subject in a self-evaluation document. This document is submitted to the QAA for use by a team of reviewers who gather evidence to enable them to report their judgements on the academic standards and the quality of learning opportunities. Review activities include meeting staff and students, scrutinising students' assessed work, reading relevant documents, and examining learning resources. Full details of the process of subject review can be found in the Handbook for academic review, QAA, 2000.
The range of judgements that reviewers may utilise when they have completed a subject review are summarised below.
To reach this judgement, reviewers look at:
Reviewers make one of the following judgements for each of three aspects of learning opportunities:
The three aspects of quality of learning opportunities are:
Reviewers also report the degree of confidence they have in the institution's ability to maintain and enhance quality and standards in the subject under review.
1. This report presents the findings of a review of the academic standards achieved, and the quality of the learning opportunities provided, in philosophy at the University of Aberdeen. The review was completed in the academic year 2001-02.
2. Philosophy is currently offered on the following programmes:
The programmes are based in the Department of Philosophy, part of the Faculty of Arts and Divinity. In 2001-02, there were 89 full-time equivalent (FTE) students following the programmes. Teaching and learning is carried out at the Aberdeen Campus.
3. The central educational aim of the Department is to provide an integrated, broad and balanced education in philosophy at sub-degree, first-degree and taught postgraduate level that is responsive to the contemporary discipline and reflective of the distinctive traditions of philosophical education in Scotland.
4. In pursuing its aims, the Department seeks to bring together and integrate the 'analytic' and the 'continental', the contemporary and the historical, and the conceptual and the normative into a unified and rigorous education in philosophy.
5. Subsidiary aims of the subject provision include the following:
6. Programme specifications are available for all awards in philosophy; they are compatible with the Subject benchmark statement for philosophy.
7. A single programme specification covers most of the MA awards in philosophy. These range from a single honours (Mental Philosophy), 25 combinations of joint honours, and two major/minor combinations, together with the designated (non-honours) award. The aims of each award (single, joint, major or minor) are articulated in terms of the degree or amount to which the learning outcomes are achieved ('thorough', 'substantial', 'significant' or 'adequate'). The rationale for most of the subject combinations is outlined; however, more precise differentiation of learning outcomes for different combinations would be welcome.
8. Students study a number of subjects in their first two years and identify their specialisms at honours level during that period. Learning outcomes for these courses are appropriately differentiated and cater both for students progressing in philosophy and for those continuing in other subjects. Students taking single modules at higher levels are not explicitly catered for; their enrolment is agreed on a case-by-case basis, subject to the advice of staff.
9. The awards combined with physics (MA Natural Philosophy and BSc Physics with Philosophy) are essentially a major/minor combination; they have their own programme specification on the grounds that this programme does not provide the same level of education in philosophy as the other philosophy honours programmes in terms of number of modules or their range. However, it is hard to see why this programme is treated differently from other major/minor programmes that are included in the general document, particularly as the learning outcomes are, for the most part, identical.
10. Separate documents are provided for the three MLitt programmes (Philosophy, Scottish Philosophy, Philosophy and Technology); however, the learning outcomes are the same in all three cases. Given the different aims and the specialised content of the programmes, learning outcomes could be more precisely focused for each programme. The programme specifications for these awards note that teaching methods may be adjusted where student numbers are low; a programme of guided reading with regular discussions with staff is offered instead of more conventional classes. If numbers are low, as they have been in recent years (three to six each year), the learning outcomes should be reviewed in the light of the method of delivery and adjusted accordingly. Staff should also consider whether the small numbers on some modules in the honours programme require a similar review and adjustment of their learning outcomes.
11. The reviewers noted that learning outcomes are not differentiated between the analytic and continental traditions of Philosophy; nor is the module on Indian Philosophy noted as distinctive in relation to these traditions. It would seem that philosophical skills are taken to be the same and equally applicable to all philosophical texts, whatever their origin or context. The programme specification would be improved if this position were more clearly articulated.
12. Staff have worked hard at assimilating the new outcomes-oriented approach and embedding it at programme and module level. Learning outcomes are included in the programme and module handbooks and students are invited to comment on the achievement of objectives in the evaluation form, completed at the end of each course. At the meeting with the reviewers, students were clearly familiar with the intended outcomes, at least in outline, and expressed themselves satisfied that they knew what was expected of them.
13. The reviewers conclude that the learning outcomes of programmes in philosophy have been carefully developed and are appropriate; they are well understood by staff and have been communicated effectively to students. They note also that the Department views development of the programme specifications included with the self-evaluation document as an ongoing process; this is welcome, and the reviewers suggest the development of a more precise differentiation of learning outcomes for different combinations, and a clear rationale for the separate programme specification for the combinations with physics.
14. In addition, clearer articulation of the implicit position that philosophical skills are the same and equally applicable to all philosophical texts, whatever their origin or context, and a review and adjustment of the learning outcomes for modules at postgraduate and honours level in the light of actual class numbers, would further benefit the provision.
15. The programmes are carefully articulated in terms of the progressive development expected of students, and related closely to the specifications in the Subject benchmark statement for philosophy. The structure is designed to promote flexibility and to be responsive to the changing interests of students, and it succeeds in that many students change their intended specialism during this period. Level 1 modules are designed to introduce students to philosophical skills and to whet their appetites. Level 2 modules are more focused; they provide students with more technical skills and lay the foundations of the study of history through two compulsory survey courses. Students may then construct a wide variety of programmes, following through various themes and interests in the option courses offered at levels 3 and 4. The width and scope of the provision is further enhanced by a module on Indian Philosophy.
16. Staff have taken a strong position on the place of formal logic in programmes of study in philosophy; the Logic I module is required for honours students and must be completed in the first two years of study. This is not an easy choice and the Department is to be commended for taking a clear view, and for the careful and thorough way in which it has successfully implemented its decision. Students were enthusiastic about their experience of this module and the number of students choosing the optional modules offered at higher levels is a testimony to the success of the level 1 course.
17. A clear strength of the provision is the emphasis on the history of philosophy; 50 per cent of the modules at levels 3 and 4 must be chosen from the focused history modules on offer. The strategy here is clear enough in terms of content, although the articulation in terms of skills has not been fully developed. It is not clear that the skills required for the survey courses at level 2 are well integrated into the skills developed in the focused courses offered at levels 3 and 4.
18. The modules at levels 3 and 4 range over both analytic and continental philosophical traditions. The strategy here, however, is not merely to provide distinct courses in the two narratives separately, but to refer to texts in both traditions wherever it is appropriate or relevant to do so. Students are thus encouraged and enabled to engage with both traditions in a constructive way; this blending of the narratives is a clear decision which is followed through effectively in the construction and implementation of the programme: this is excellent practice. The success of the approach was clear in students' essays, which treated views and texts from both narratives as the topic demanded, rather than in accord with the boundaries of a syllabus.
19. All honours students are expected and encouraged to become familiar with current research at level 4. This aim is strongly supported by the four research-related, special-subject modules which enable staff to offer students intensive study of a subject that they are researching, and by the level 4 dissertation. An impressive range of choice is available. This means that comparatively few students are taking some modules; the minimum group size is set at eight at levels 3 and 4. So long as these numbers can be maintained, the small groups at these levels make possible more individual attention from staff, and so are a great opportunity for students; care needs to be taken, however, to see that all the learning outcomes of these modules are achieved.
20. The provision is effective in integrating subject combinations across the curriculum. There are opportunities for students to reflect on the connections between philosophy and a wide range of disciplines. In some cases, the connections are explicitly addressed by specific modules (Film Studies); in other cases (Political and Social Philosophy), the connections are inherent in a standard philosophical topic. In the context of the wide range of subject combinations available, this is good practice, although a more systematic approach to identifying the available combinations would be an improvement for students and advisers.
21. Research support for the provision is good. The MLitt Scottish Philosophy benefits from its link with the Reid project and the MLitt Philosophy and Technology is sponsored by the Centre for Philosophy, Technology and Society.
22. The reviewers conclude that the curriculum is well designed to enable students to achieve the learning outcomes specified.
23. The assessment instruments used by the Department have been the subject of discussion and change over recent years. The Department has moved away from a process in which continuous assessment was used for the first two years of the course and examination assessment thereafter, to a situation in which all courses are assessed by both examination and essay marks. There has also been the introduction of a small percentage of course marks being used to measure various aspects of tutorial and seminar work. These mechanisms enable students to demonstrate fully their achievement of the various learning outcomes.
24. Information relating to the assessment criteria is available to students through student handbooks and the departmental web site. There is also a university common assessment scale, which the Department has adapted to meet its own particular needs. There is evidence available that both students and examiners understand the present procedures and are happy with their implementation. External examiners are confident that the mechanisms in place and the underlining criteria enable them to distinguish between the different categories of achievement.
25. The introduction of the tutorial/seminar mark was designed to address problems relating to attendance and participation in such classes. The reviewers recognise that such problems are common across the sector. Such a procedure is good in that it rewards consistent attendance and provides a means of monitoring students' preparation for classes. However, there does seem to be a problem integrating this practice within the overall assessment strategy. Unlike the marks awarded for essays and examinations, where the criteria for such marks are transparent, the tutorial/seminar marks are designed to serve several functions at once; attendance, preparation and participation in classes, and therefore the criteria underpinning such marks are vague and their award is opaque. Also, essay and examination marks are easily available for both internal and external monitoring, while the award of tutorial and seminar marks is extremely difficult to monitor internally and cannot be monitored by external examiners. Because these marks represent a small percentage of the marks available, and because some of these marks simply register attendance, this may not be an important problem; however, the reviewers recommend that the Department readdress this issue.
26. The Department pays appropriate attention to the function of assessment in students' work. Essays are returned quickly with a comment sheet that enables staff to both indicate achievement relative to the common assessment scale and comment upon the subject-specific content of the work. Oral feedback is also available. The reviewers note, however, that the Department has registered doubts about the effectiveness of the present comment sheets and has plans to replace them in the near future; the reviewers agree with such doubts. Some of the work the reviewers examined had very few comments on the texts and only perfunctory comments on the assessment sheets. While they appreciate that such work may be the subject of oral feedback, they think that the Department should ensure that all students receive an appropriate amount of written feedback and that this is monitored. The Department's attempts to develop a fuller system that includes feedback upon examination performance are welcome.
27. Overall, the assessment process and the instruments used in this process are appropriate and effective. However, the matters to which the reviewers refer to specifically should be addressed.
28. The Department's honours students meet the level of attainment expected by the subject community and surpass such expectations in some aspects, for example, the integration of the analytic and continental traditions. External examiners have consistently praised the level of the students' work. The Department has many level 1 and 2 students who do not proceed to a degree in philosophy, but those that do proceed perform at a good level of academic achievement. The clear majority of honours students graduate with an award of Upper Second class honours or above and there are very few students who get poor marks. The sample of work the reviewers looked at was generally of a high standard, and some of it was excellent. It displayed both the depth and breadth emphasised within the learning outcomes and the fluency, use of argument, critical analysis, intellectual rigour and precision of thought appropriate to the study of philosophy. The best work showed real independence of thought. The emphasis upon logic within the Department has been entirely successful. It strikingly addresses the practical skills component of the learning outcomes. That the students evidently enjoy their classes in logic, and that many of them go on to do further logic, is a great commendation of the Department's efforts in this area.
29. With respect to academic standards, the reviewers conclude that:
Overall, the reviewers have confidence in the academic standards achieved by the programmes in philosophy at the University of Aberdeen.
30. The Department is very effective in relating its teaching and learning aims to its declared programme aims and curriculum content. It has taken considerable efforts to communicate its chosen learning aims and outcomes (LAOs) on a global and local scale. Such communication is achieved by an efficient faculty-based undergraduate advisers scheme, an articulate set of programme documents and specific collections of modular course documents. The latter indicate that the overall programme aims and intended outcomes are translated successfully into the Department's local documentation. The reviewers were impressed by the enthusiasm and seriousness characteristic of the Department's approach to teaching. Individual staff members who spoke to the reviewers were not only aware of the Department's chosen LAOs, but were actively involved in applying them to their own teaching modules.
31. The Department employs a wide range of teaching methods (lectures, seminars, tutorials, programmed reading and writing, and interactive computer-based course material), the effectiveness of which is kept under annual review. Student participation in the teaching programme is ensured by tutorial and seminar involvement and programmed essay assignments. It is notable that the Student Association assists students for their active preparation in the course and effectively contributes to the realisation of the Department's aim to achieve a high degree of student participation in learning. Students provide written reports on the modules they attend, which are then forwarded to the Department's Teaching and Learning Committee. An innovative Philosophy Students' Forum manages student course responses and monitors effectively the continuing availability of course texts.
32. Staff are engaged across a variety of research activities. Not only does this clearly shape the Department's teaching programmes, but it accounts for the broad range of interests that characterises the Department's teaching portfolio. Research projects range across aesthetics, ethics, analytic philosophy, logic and the philosophy of the continental tradition, and these exhibit a width and depth worthy of the parent institution. Some senior honours modules have been specifically designed to match student commitment with staff research enthusiasms. The correlation of staff research and teaching interests is the subject of positive comments by external examiners.
33. The Department offers high-quality learning materials. Course booklets are detailed, thorough and, in the case of the sub-honours logic programme, highly innovative and user-friendly. The booklet PH1011 for Formal Logic is commendable for how it makes difficult material accessible and for its useful glossary of philosophical terms. Student course evaluation forms for 2001-02 comment positively on the quality of the learning materials, on the careful choice of appropriate course texts, on informative web sites and on the general enthusiasm of staff. The Department monitors closely the effectiveness of its adopted learning materials. It achieves a 75 per cent return on course evaluation documents and clearly assimilates students' views concerning a wide range of educational issues. This is a department committed to delivering a good quality learning experience for its students.
34. With regard to strategies for staff development to enhance their teaching performance, on an institutional level the Department abides by the University of Aberdeen Staff Procedures on Probation (June 1997). The Department recognises that it has no formal internal peer review structure currently in place. The reviewers were assured that such a structure will shortly be established. Nevertheless, the use of staff away days, the Teaching and Learning Committee minutes and the Students' Forum records all indicate that the development of teaching practice is regularly discussed.
35. Student workload was discussed on at least two occasions during the visit. The Department is properly sensitive to pressure points and has endeavoured to adjust them. When asked by the reviewers, student representatives were content with the management of the workload.
36. Philosophy teaching at the University is structured by the customary Scottish division between sub-honours (levels 1 and 2) and honours teaching (levels 3 to 4). The use of tutorial preparatory notes at level 1 through to level 4 modules, which are based on research issues, indicate that teaching is carried out according to a progressive programme. The clear pleasure the student representatives took in recounting their experience of philosophy at the University indicated that the Department is highly effective in communicating the nature of philosophy. The significant student numbers reading philosophy with another subject suggest that the Department succeeds in communicating the relevance of philosophy and its associated skills to the study of other disciplines.
37. Students are presented with both an unusually effective treatment of the alternative schools of philosophy and a stimulating approach to logic using contemporary materials. Integration of the analytic and the continental traditions of philosophy means that students see them as providing answers to common problems and, therefore, see both traditions as engaged in the common business of philosophy. Evidence gained from the student discussion and inspection of student work revealed to the reviewers that, not only was the claim of being able to integrate the traditions being achieved, it was being achieved in a manner beyond obvious expectations. Material in the formal logic course is current and relevant to a broad walk of life, is enjoyed by the students and delivered in a variety of modes of teaching that includes the use of on-line tutorial support. The course handbook contains examples of how formal logic can be used to analyse the meaning of pop music lyrics. Devices such as this help create a relevancy, currency and enhancement of the appeal of the material. Students claim that the skills learnt through the formal logic course provide transferable skills used in their subsequent study of philosophy and other subjects. The reviewers also observed evidence within students' work that they were using formal logic to tackle general philosophical problems. The reviewers consider that the way in which the Department has created a teaching and learning environment that provides students with a holistic and integrated experience of philosophical study, as shown by the two examples, is an exemplary feature of provision.
38. The provision contributes substantially to the achievement of the intended outcomes, with most elements demonstrating good practice.
The quality of teaching and learning is commendable.
39. It is clear that the Department offers a relaxed and supportive learning environment which is highly valued by students. Students are given formal support either in terms of written advice or in terms of classes dedicated to transferable skills, for example, essay-writing, and they also benefit from the 'corridor culture' which enables them to easily get in touch with particular members of the academic staff to discuss problems. All students are allocated an adviser of studies to monitor their progress and discuss any relevant issues. The reviewers think it commendable that such advisers are selected rather than chosen by rote. Students have to meet these advisers annually and are automatically directed to see them if they become 'at risk'. Class attendance is monitored and overseen by the course coordinators. Such a support network, which is supplemented by the University's support system, helps to produce excellent progression rates. Although the Department teaches students at level 1 and 2 who do not intend to take honours philosophy, the majority of those that do progress to completion.
40. There are effective arrangements in place for admission and induction, which result from cooperation between the Department and the offices of the University. Such arrangements are understood by both the students and staff.
41. The adviser of studies system and the friendly and open nature of the department mean that student concerns can usually be dealt with quickly and effectively. However, the reviewers did note from the Students' Forum that questions have been raised about progression on the honours programme. It was suggested there that such questions would be addressed in lectures. Our evidence from meeting with students seemed to indicate that such matters are addressed, but the reviewers wonder whether such an informal procedure is appropriate for such an important matter.
42. The arrangements for academic tutorial support are generally clear and understood by both students and staff. However, in the particular case of the dissertation, this seems not to be the case. There is no documentation concerning the dissertation and, therefore, advice is left up to individual tutors; there is also no formal mechanism for monitoring dissertation supervision. While the reviewers appreciate that the keenness of dissertation students might ensure regular meetings with staff, reliance upon this alone seems problematic. For the sake of both the students and the Department, the reviewers think that a more formal requirement to attend dissertation classes should be built into the system.
43. The provision contributes substantially to the achievement of the intended outcomes, with most elements demonstrating good practice.
The quality of student progression is commendable.
44. The Department is comprised of two professors, two senior lecturers, five lecturers and 1.4 FTE support staff. The Department deploys its staff according to their individual skills and research expertise to deliver a wide-ranging philosophy programme. Staff members' curricula vitae showed them to be highly experienced academics and teachers whose research supports the achievement of the intended learning outcomes, especially at level 4. All taught courses are properly staffed, very well supported in terms of learning documentation and backed up with well-constructed and informative web sites. The minutes of the various departmental committees indicate a well-coordinated body of staff supported by effective managerial practices and an able departmental secretary. The programmes have effective technical and administrative support. Communication with students is by means of email and/or departmental notices. A visit to the Department revealed its notice-boards to be up to date and well managed. The Department makes effective use of its human and technical resources.
45. The teaching takes place in staff offices and seminar and lecture rooms, which are a collective faculty resource and managed accordingly. The latter are reasonably decorated and endowed with technical support. A visual inspection revealed the teaching rooms to be of adequate size for the numbers on the philosophy programme, but the minutes of the Teaching and Learning Committee indicate that there can be a difficulty with competition between departments for the more popular lecture halls and seminar rooms. The University should be invited to monitor room needs more acutely.
46. Staff offices appeared to be suitably equipped with desktop computers sourced from both the Faculty and the Department's own equipment budgets. It is clear that the philosophy programmes are well supported by the University's library and the Computer Services Unit, both of which are imaginatively managed. All students are given an induction course into the characteristics and capacities of the University's information technology network and library resources. The philosophy collection is wide ranging, has up-to-date stock and a core history and philosophy of science section, and is housed in well-lit areas of the library with comfortable working spaces. The establishment of a heavy demand section within the library is a popular innovation. The Department has a library allocation allowance of £13,400, £5,200 of which is given over to books and £8,200 to journals (66 are currently subscribed to). The Department is to be commended for the evident care it takes to choose appropriate and attractively priced course texts. The ratio of students to PCs is currently under 10:1 and the University is targeting a commendable ratio of 5:1 in the near future. The laptop borrowing pilot programme is a highly commendable development. It should be noted, however, that some student course evaluation forms comment on an insufficient number of key history of philosophy texts. The reviewers draw attention to the role of the departmental library officer, that may require some strengthening.
47. The provision contributes substantially to the achievement of the intended outcomes, with most elements demonstrating good practice.
The quality of learning resources is commendable.
48. The University's approach to the assurance of quality and standards attributes ownership of courses and programmes to academic departments, delegates responsibility for the quality of teaching and learning provision, and for the academic standards of awards. There is a robust committee structure at university and faculty level, overseen by the University Committee on Teaching and Learning (UCTL) and the relevant Academic Standards Committee (ASC).
49. The reviewers were impressed by the depth and thoroughness of the monitoring and evaluation procedures. For instance, the Department of Philosophy underwent an internal teaching review in May 1999. All the recommendations from that report have been addressed and most have been implemented.
50. Internal oversight of quality and standards is provided by the Philosophy Students' Forum, which replaced the Board of Studies as the centre of staff-student communication, and by the departmental Teaching and Learning Committee. Reports on each course are made to these committees each year.
51. The Student Association provides training for student representatives on the Philosophy Students' Forum; in the view of the reviewers, this is very good practice and may well contribute to the effective way that student opinion is represented on that committee.
52. Student opinion is also systematically gathered through the student course evaluation forms completed by students after each course; these included both tick-box and discursive sections, but are being revised in the light of experience to become more discursive.
53. External examiners' reports are made to the University each year. They are considered by the UCTL and the relevant ASC, and the Department's response is monitored. External examiners are also consulted about major changes to curriculum or procedures. They clearly play an active role in maintaining and enhancing quality and standards.
54. Minutes of the departmental committee meetings show that these committees provide effective and vigorous oversight of the provision. In particular, student comment is taken seriously by the Department and changes are made in response to it.
55. The reviewers were impressed by the way in which staff and students approached the review process. Meetings were characterized by open and frank discussion, which was very helpful to the review. This spirit is fundamental to the successful operation of any system, and the Department is to be commended for fostering it so successfully.
56. On the basis of the evidence provided, the reviewers conclude that the Department has measures in place to enable it to maintain and enhance the quality of its provision and the standards of the University's awards, and is implementing them effectively.
Philosophy programmes at the University of Aberdeen were reviewed in the academic year 2001-02. Judgements were made about the academic standards achieved and the quality of the learning opportunities provided.
The review covered the following programmes:
Overall, the reviewers have confidence in the academic standards achieved by the programmes in philosophy at the University of Aberdeen.
Strengths include:
Issues include:
The quality of teaching and learning is commendable:
The reviewers find the following feature of the provision is exemplary:
Issues include:
The quality of student progression is commendable:
Issues include:
The quality of learning resources is commendable:
The reviewers conclude that the Department has a range of measures in place to enable it to maintain and enhance the quality of its provision and the standards of the University's awards. There is evidence that monitoring and evaluation is effective and ongoing in the Department, and there is an ethos of open and frank discussion between staff and students that contributes to the attainment of quality and standards.