Anda di halaman 1dari 100
& AKMI METROPOLITAN COLLEGE MEMBER OF AKMI EDUCATIONAL ORGANISATION VALIDATION DOCUMENT BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (HONOURS) DEGREE

&

& AKMI METROPOLITAN COLLEGE MEMBER OF AKMI EDUCATIONAL ORGANISATION VALIDATION DOCUMENT BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (HONOURS) DEGREE

AKMI METROPOLITAN COLLEGE MEMBER OF AKMI EDUCATIONAL ORGANISATION

VALIDATION DOCUMENT

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (HONOURS) DEGREE IN DIETETICS-ATHENS

JUNE 2011

CONTENTS

 

Page

 

Summary

2

  • 1 Introduction and Rationale

3-4

  • 2 Market research

4-5

  • 3 Aims and objectives

5-9

  • 4 Programme structure

9-12

  • 5 Learning, teaching and assessment methods

13-17

  • 6 Placements

17-19

  • 7 Admission criteria

19-20

  • 8 Regulations

21-22

  • 9 Student support

22-23

  • 10 Resources

23-25

 
  • 11 Staff

26-27

  • 12 Programme management

27

  • 13 Quality assurance procedures

27-28

  • 14 References

28-29

 

APPENDICES:

I

Module descriptors- separate document

30

II

Members of the planning team

31

III

Assessment regulations

32-54

IV

Aims & learning outcomes for Placement blocks A, B & C

55-61

Va

Mapping of programme content (modules) to QAA Benchmark

61

Vb

Statements for Dietetics and EFAD Academic & Practitioner Standards Mapping to the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Practice Placement Standards and EFAD Placement Standards for Dietitians

62-69

VI

Mapping of curriculum to Professional rights of Harokopion University graduates

72-73

VII

Memorandum of Understanding with dietetic placements providers

74

VIII

Scottish Dietetic Placement Allocation Policy

75-81

IX

Approval and Monitoring of Practice Placements

82-92

X

Proposed Application Form for BSc (Hons) Dietetics

93-97

Summary

Programme title(s)

BSc (Hons) Dietetics-Athens

SCQF level of award

Level 10

Subsidiary exit points

Completion of Level 1:Certificate of Higher Education (SCQF level 7) Completion of Level 1 & 2: Diploma of Higher Education (SCQF level 8) Completion of Level 1- 3: BSc Degree (SCQF level 9)** ** Note that the degree in Dietetics is an Honours award only, there is not a BSc Dietetics exit award.

Delivered by

AKMI ATHENS EDUCATIONAL ORGANISATION

Mode of study

Full time

Duration

4 years Minimum and maximum time periods for completion, full and part time.

Subject Area

Dietetics, Nutrition & Biological Sciences

Programme Leader

Dr Stavroula Stoupi

Academic Link Person

Dr Sara Smith

Expected student numbers

15-20

Start date

September 2011

1.

Introduction and rationale

This document outlines a new collaborative modular programme of studies between QMU and AMC leading to the award of the Bachelor of Science Degree (with Honours) in Dietetics – Athens. This is an extension of the existing collaborative relationship between AMC and QMU, the intention is to now develop and deliver a Bsc (Hons) Dietetics programme in Athens from September 2011. The European Federation of the Associations of Dietitians (EFAD) has adopted in principle, the International Congress of Dietetic Associations (ICDA) definition of the role of the Dietitian as follows:

‘A dietitian is a person with qualifications in nutrition and dietetics recognised by national authority(s). The dietitian applies the science of nutrition to the feeding and education of groups of people and individuals in health and disease. The scope of dietetic practice is such that dietitians may work in a variety of settings and have a variety of work functions.’

Further to this, the British Dietetic Association (BDA) description of a dietitian below expands on the international definition, illustrating the many aspects of dietetic practice which must be underpinned

by the curriculum for education and training and the new AMC programme in line with the existing QMU programme will continue to follow these guiding principles Registered dietitians are the only qualified health professionals that assess, diagnose and treat diet and nutrition problems at an individual and wider public health level. Uniquely, dietitians use the most up to date public health and scientific research on food, health and disease, which they translate into practical guidance to enable people to make appropriate lifestyle and food choices.

As a scientific discipline Nutrition and Dietetics has been in existence for over 36 years in Greece. The Hellenic Dietetic Association (HDA) was established in 1969 and more recently, in 2006, the Hellenic Association of Hospital Dietitians was established. According to Greek legislation, all these associations need to unite into one body in the future and this is currently ongoing (Association of Dietitians Nutritionists Greece).

Currently these associations have no right in the granting of professional rights and there is no legislation in effect that guides the enrollment of Dietitians to a register. Their specialty is essentially defined by the educational institution from which the dietitian has graduated.

Currently, the local prefecture is obliged to issue “license to practice dietetics” (license to operate a practice) to graduates from the Greek State Universities with the relevant degrees. Graduates of this programme can obtain their professional rights under the directive of the EU which has been incorporated into Greek law. The European Union directive (DIRECTIVE 2005/36/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications), dictates Greek legislation to accept professional rights obtained from local educational institutes which are collaborating with EU recognised universities. According to the EU directive, graduates must apply to the UK Health Professions Council (HPC), and once they acquire their professional rights from HPC, then they can apply to the Greek Professional Body and transfer their professional rights from Britain to Greece. The Greek legislation has created a temporary body, the Hellenic Council for the Recognition of professional qualifications (SAEP) of the Ministry of Education for the period until 2013, when all Greek organizations that will be providing professional rights will have been formed.

As it is the intention of the AMC Dietetics programme to closely mirror the existing QMU programme which already follows the HPC Standards of Education and Training and the British Dietetic Association Curriculum Guidance and it confers eligibility for registration with the HPC, it is anticipated that graduates of the BSc (Hons) in Dietetics-Athens programme will be able to apply for registration with the HPC via the international application route.

As stated above, the philosophy of the new dietetic programme οf studies at AMC will follow the philosophy of the homonymous existing dietetics programme at QMU as it is orientated to deliver a curriculum with the same aims and the same objectives. However, additionally, the new programme has also considered the needs of the Greek society that the prospective students of dietetics are most likely to work within, along with any relevant Greek standards and guidelines they would be expected to meet.

The following documents have provided valuable reference points, indicative content and standards which have also influenced the new programmes’ content, assessment, teaching and learning strategies.

Key documents include:

The British Dietetic Association (BDA)- Dietetic Career Framework (for entry level) 2008

(incorporates NHS knowledge and Skills Framework 2004) The Health Professions Council (HPC) Standards of Proficiency (SOPS)–Dietitians 2007

The Health Professions Council (HPC) Standards of Education and Training (SETS)

Guidance (2007) The British Dietetic Association Code of Professional Conduct (2008)

Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) Level Descriptors

The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) for Higher Education Benchmarking Statements-

Dietetics (2001) The QAA Code of Practice; Section 9: Work-based and placement learning (2007)

The QAA Enhancement themes

QELTA Strategy

QMU UG Attributes

The Professional rights of graduates of Harokopion University, Department of Science of

Dietetics-Nutrition Official Government Gazette F.E.K. (of the H.R.)/O.G.G Presidential Decree No 311 European Practice Placement Standards for Dietetics (2010). European Federation of Associations of Dietitians (EFAD)

  • 2. Market research

The health system in Greece does not guarantee the direct employment of Dietetic graduates in public hospitals and rehabilitation institutions and it is rather based on the private sector. The majority of dietitians in Greece work in their own professional practices, in the private sector, hospitals and rehabilitation institutions or even by visiting patients at home. Furthermore, in public hospitals and private clinics, as freelance professionals, in the food industry, pharmaceutical industry, in education, media, public health, scientific research, food promotion, sports organizations, groups and clubs.

The academic status that applies in Greece is that studies of university education are divided into two levels, higher and (the) highest. The educational institutions of higher level are called Technological Educational Institutions (TEI) and the duration of studies is usually three years or in some cases four. The educational institutions of the highest level are called Highest Educational Institutions (AEI), which means Universities, with studies duration of four to six or seven years.

At present, the existing training opportunities in Greece are as follows:

At the university level (AEI)

Harokopion University Athens, Department of Dietetics & Nutritional Sciences

Note that only AEI graduates (i.e. HUA graduates) are clinical dietitians.

At the TEI level

Technological Educational Institute of Thessaloniki, Faculty of Nutrition and Dietetics

Department of Nutrition & Dietetics, Technological Educational Institute of Crete Trypitos

Siteia, Crete. Technological Educational Institute of Larissa, Karditsa. Department of Nutrition & Dietetics

The study curriculum offered by TEI departments focuses more on Nutrition and Food Technology. At the AEI level, there is only one University where students can study Dietetics, at Harokopion University Athens.

The following table (Table 2.1) indicates number of candidates accepted every year at these institutions.

Table 2.1. Number of accepted students per year per school

 

2011-2012

Schools

Accepted students

Harokopion University Athens, Department of Dietetics & Nutritional Sciences

40

Thessalonica TEI, Faculty of Nutrition & Dietetics

80

Technological Educational Institute of Crete Trypitos Siteia, Crete. Department of Nutrition & Dietetics

150

Technological Educational Institute of Larissa, Karditsa. Department of Nutrition & Dietetics

180

*Data taken from http://edu.klimaka.gr

The above data contribute to the increased demand for studies at the academic level in the field of dietetics as a profession.

Furthermore, during the last years there is an increasing amount of students studying Dietetics at the Institute of Vocational Training (IVT) diploma level. The IEK AKMI introduced Dietetics as a two- year curriculum similar to HND level in 2004 and the number of enrolled students has been following an upward trend. Year Students 2004: 18 2005: 23 2006: 31 2007: 38 2008: 44 2009: 56 2010: 62

The two-year IVT programme of studies provides graduates with the dietitian’s assistant diploma. However, a considerable amount of these students are willing to expand their studies at the academic level. The same demand has been expressed by professional dietitian assistants. They wish to enhance their knowledge in Dietetics without taking part in national examinations for Greek state AEI & TEI enrolments.

The rising issue of overweight and obesity along with the related implications in the form of chronic diseases is well documented for Europe. Results of scientific research conducted in Greece and elsewhere demonstrate the high demand for dietitians required by the Greek market. Greece has the lead in calorific consumption and the most obese children across the whole of Europe (Farajian et al, 2011; Tzotzas et al, 2008).

This would therefore suggest that there are further opportunities and a market for the development of another degree programme in Greece and in this instance Athens.

The programme will be advertised by AMC according the QMU marketing regulations, in order to promote the value of the collaborative programme and the strong connection with QMU; Details of the programme are provided by the AMC and QMU website.

  • 3. Aims and objectives

The aims and learning outcomes of the AKMI Athens Dietetics programme, essentially mirror those of the existing QMU Dietetics programme, which are aligned to the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels, and the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Benchmark Statement for Dietetics, the European Federation of the Associations of Dietitians (EFAD) Academic and Practitioner Standards and the British Dietetic Association (BDA) Curriculum Framework for the pre-registration education and training of Dietitians.

Overall programme aims

Aims

To provide a programme of study that develops a sound understanding of the issues and concepts related to Dietetics: health, well-being and disease at individual, community and population levels.

To develop the ability to integrate contributory disciplines in the analysis and interpretation of factors influencing the maintenance or improvement of health and disturbance of the body’s functions in relation to disease.

To develop in students the capacity for critical, analytical, reflective and independent thinking so that they become effective problem solvers and continuing learners both as students and in their subsequent careers.

To encourage a research mindedness on the part of students so that they may better understand and evaluate relevant research, compare merits of alternative hypotheses and be able to undertake research themselves and in turn contributing to evidence based practice to support clinical intervention.

To facilitate the progressive development in students of a range of transferable skills relevant to the world of work including methods of communication, the commitment to life- long learning and a professional and ethical approach to working

To develop experimental and practical skills related to their field of study with associated skills in design of investigations, data collection, analysis and reporting.

To develop a student whose approach is proactive and flexible, has the ability to work within a diverse and multi-professional domain and can recognise and respond positively to changing needs or demographics.

To develop a student who has the ability to work as, and be recognised, as a competent

clinical dietician

 

Overall programme learning outcomes

On completion of the programme the student will be able to:

Integrate knowledge of Dietetics and related subjects relevant to Dietetics especially in the context of improving and sustaining health as well as treating disease, at individual, community and population levels (KU, IS).

Demonstrate

critical

understanding

of

multidisciplinary

and

interdisciplinary

factors

influencing the body’s functions, metabolism and overall health or disease (KU, PS)

Analyse, interpret and evaluate data and information both within and across disciplines (KU, PS, IS, TS)

Demonstrate research mindedness through the ability to evaluate current research and to undertake research themselves (IS, PS, TS).

Demonstrate

the

capacity

for

sustained

independent

work,

problem

solving

and

management of their own learning (PS, TS).

 

Display competency in a range of transferable skills relevant to the world of work (PS, TS)

 

Knowledge and Understanding (KU)

Intellectual Skills (IS)

Practical Skills (PS)

Transferable Skills (TS)

The AKMI Athens Dietetics programme will also endeavour to embrace the complimentary programme aims for all QMU Undergraduate programmes, in that they will aim to foster graduates who have, in addition to the knowledge and skills required for the specific discipline of Dietetics, will aspire to develop graduates who:

have academic, professional and personal skills for career management and personal

development; undertake and use research: understanding the nature and boundaries of knowledge

creation; applying skills of enquiry, critical analysis, synthesis and creative thinking to investigate problems; systematically collecting and evaluating evidence; and proposing solutions; conduct themselves professionally and ethically, respecting the diversity of others;

have the capacity to help build a socially just and sustainable society, striving for high

levels of social, ethical, cultural and environmental conduct; are mindful of their role as global citizens, contributing positively to society at local,

national or international levels; demonstrate high level skills of information literacy and communication to create and

share knowledge; promote the principles of multi-/inter-disciplinarity;

are confident, responsible, autonomous and critically reflective lifelong learners.

Level 1: Aims and learning outcomes

Aims

  • a) To introduce students

to

fundamental

knowledge,

principles

and

concepts

in human Dietetics and other disciplines which underpin the students’ programme of studies.

  • b) To begin to integrate knowledge, principles and concepts from different subjects so that students’ understanding develops as an interdisciplinary continuum rather than as separated areas.

  • c) To begin the process of developing core skills: study skills, technological and practical skills, and fundamental transferable skills.

  • d) To encourage in students a sense of personal responsibility for achieving learning objectives and to develop an ability for effective self-management and reflection.

Learning Outcomes

On completion of Level 1 the student will be able to:

  • a) Demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of fundamental concepts related to Dietetics (KU)

  • b) Begin to demonstrate the ability to integrate knowledge, principles and concepts from different subjects

  • c) Demonstrate competence in basic skills in relation to: laboratory techniques, information and educational technology, analysis and interpretation of data, written and oral communication (IS, PS, TS)

  • d) Work with motivation and a degree of personal responsibility, demonstrate an ability to prioritise and effectively manage learning time, negotiate learning objectives and evaluate self and group performance (PS, TS)

Level 2: Aims and learning outcomes

Aims

  • a) To develop further the knowledge and understanding of nutrition and related subjects which underpin the study of dietetics.

  • b) To encourage further an integrated approach to knowledge, principles and concepts from subjects and other disciplines.

  • c) To continue the development research orientation

of an investigative approach to the fields of study and a

  • d) To contribute to further development of graduate skills

Learning Outcomes

On completion of Level 2 the student will be able to:

  • a) Demonstrate a sound knowledge and understanding of nutrition, dietetics and related subjects at a depth which enables evaluation from a firm scientific perspective (KU)

  • b) To further understand and integrate the fields of study (IS)

  • c) Demonstrate through the processes of analysis, evaluation and problem solving, an inquiring and investigative approach (IS, TS).

  • d) Work more independently as individuals and also demonstrate the ability to contribute effectively and constructively in group work (IS, TS)

  • e) Demonstrate an increasing level of skills in areas including: laboratory work, information technology, data analysis and interpretation, written and oral communication (IS, PS, TS).

Level 3: Aims and learning outcomes

Aims

  • a) To develop students' ability to integrate and apply principles and concepts to the understanding of factors which influence the maintenance and disturbance of health at the individual, community and population levels.

  • b) To develop further the students' ability to investigate, analyse, evaluate and apply scientific or other relevant information.

  • c) To increase ability in transferable skills including communication (individual & group) and analysis and critical evaluation of research evidence.

  • d) To develop further students’ knowledge and understanding of health, acute and enduring conditions in relation to formulating appropriate and safe dietary intervention.

  • e) To further develop the students’ clinical and professional skills needed to plan, deliver and monitor safe and practical patient or client focused intervention in a multiprofessional domain and in particular those of problem solving skills, reflection and awareness of limitations.

Learning Outcomes

On completion of Level 3 the student will be able to:

  • a) Demonstrate a high level of knowledge and understanding in the aspects of nutrition, clinical dietetics and related subjects studied (KU, IS).

  • b) Demonstrate a sound understanding of factors which influence and improve health and disease at the individual, community level and population level (KU, IS).

  • c) Demonstrate further development of transferable skills including the ability to extract, synthesise, and critically evaluate concepts, data and evidence with the ability to communicate these in appropriate and practical ways (PS, TS).

  • d) Demonstrate the appropriate professional skills (PS, TS).

Level 4: Aims and learning outcomes

Aims

  • a) To provide students with opportunities for investigation, reflection and discussion of issues related to therapeutic dietetics and health.

  • b) To enhance students' ability to analyse and critically evaluate current theories, information and research related to Dietetics and health.

  • c) To enhance the ability to synthesise material and to generate and discuss hypotheses drawing upon a range of disciplines, particularly Dietetics and health-related subjects.

  • d) To provide opportunity, resources and support for each student to design and undertake a research based investigation.

  • e) To develop further students’ ability to recognise moral and ethical issues of investigation and their awareness of the need for ethical standards and professional codes of conduct.

  • f) To develop further students' transferable personal skills, attributes and knowledge which are of applicability in the multidisciplinary context of the relevant work environments.

Learning outcomes

On completion of Level 4 the student will be able to:

  • a) Demonstrate a capacity for sustained high level, independent work, illustrated by successful design and implementation of a research project and submission of a project report which exhibits ability to interpret and critically evaluate methods and evidence (KU, IS, PS, TS).

  • b) Demonstrate a sound knowledge, understanding and an integrated view of the complex biological and other inter-relationships involved in the health of individuals, communities and populations (KU, IS).

  • c) Demonstrate an ability to solve problems through the application of appropriate theories, concepts and practical scientific expertise (IS, TS).

  • d) Demonstrate an ability to search and access information in relevant formats and sources, to recognise limitations of current evidence and hypotheses, and to identify potential avenues for future investigation (IS, TS)

  • e) Demonstrate an ability to analyse biological and other relevant scientific data using appropriate numerical or statistical methods. (IS, TS)

  • f) Demonstrate transferable personal skills, attributes and knowledge applicable to the multidisciplinary context of the relevant work environments.

  • 4. Programme structure

As per the existing QMU Dietetics programme, each academic year of the four year Athens Dietetics programme is the equivalent of 120 credits and normally the equivalent of 60 credits per semester will be undertaken by students (see Table 4.1 proposed programme structure).

All modules are considered core modules and there are no optional modules. As per the existing QMU programme it aims in a systematic manner and progressive manner, to enable the acquisition and assimilation of underpinning knowledge, integration and demonstration of skills required for practice at the point of graduation. In doing so the programme structure, content and assessment has been developed in accordance with the relevant and key QAA benchmarking statements for dietetics, the British Dietetic Association Curriculum guidelines, the European Academic and Practitioner Standards for Dietetics, the European Practice Placement Standards for Dietetics and the Health Professions Council Standards of Proficiency. A mapping of the programme content to the QAA and EFAD benchmarking statements can be found in Appendix IV and Appendix VI illustrates the mapping of the programme to the existing Professional rights of graduates of Harokopion University, Department of Science of Dietetics-Nutrition as per the Official Government Gazette F.E.K. (of the H.R.)/O.G.G Presidential Decree No 311.

Within these documents, it is recognised that Dietetic practice is underpinned by the integration of knowledge and understanding drawn from a wide range of scientific disciplines (eg genetics, biochemistry, microbiology, nutrition, physiology, pharmacology, and immunology and food science). This is therefore the focus of level 1 and 2 of the programme. The modules in levels 1 and 2 are designed to provide a sound foundation of knowledge and understanding, to build from one year to the next and to reflect the SCQF outcomes for levels 7 & 8 (SHE levels 1 & 2).

At levels 3 and 4 the focus for knowledge and understanding shifts to practical application and integration along with an increasing shifting of responsibility for learning from the academic team to the student. As such this significantly informs the module content, teaching, learning and assessment strategies. (See learning, teaching and assessment methods for further discussion). With regards to knowledge and understanding, Levels 3 and 4 introduce the major diseases within the population and examine how current medical and dietary intervention influences outcome (Therapeutic Dietetics, Clinical Sciences, Placement B and C). It also further develops knowledge and understanding regarding the nutritional needs and requirements for specific groups, prevention of disease and health and well being (Epidemiology, Applied Nutrition, Placement B and C)

It is also recognised that at the end of the programme Dietetic students must be able to incorporate this knowledge and understanding into the acquisition and demonstration of a range of complex skills. The necessary skills eg autonomous and reflective thinking, problem solving, responsibility for own learning, knowing the limits of their own practice, evidence based and effective practice, are also developed progressively through the programme from the point of entry (KIS 1, IPE 1 & 2, Integrating module 2, Professional Studies, Therapeutic Dietetics, Placement blocks A, B, C). The aim being to instil a commitment to lifelong learning and to provide students with the ability to develop flexible approaches and change their practices in line with service needs.

Several key external documents highlight the importance of students developing effective communication skills with both individuals and groups at all levels as this underpins all aspects of a dietitian’s practice. As such attention has been paid to the development of communication skills both verbal and written either in the module content, delivery of the module or assessment of the modules at each level (see methods of learning, teaching and assessment for further discussion).

Finally, the integration of theory and practice plays a central role in the programme design, therefore the three blocks of practice placements are integrated into the programme at levels 2, 3 and 4 (see placement section for further discussion).

However, although the proposed AKMI programme has close alignment to the curriculum content and assessment of the existing QMU programme, there have been on discussion with the Athens Programme Team, a few minor changes, which reflect differences in Healthcare systems (UK versus Greek) and that the programme is being taught at AKMI in Greece, rather than QMU in Scotland. These changes have been supported by the QMU Dietetics programme team and are as follows:

Level 1:

Inter Professional Education 1(IPE 1) (20 credits) has been removed as this is a module as previously it has not been thought to meet the needs of Allied Health Professions working in Greece

(previous Athens Physiotherapy validation). As this is a module that requires to be taught alongside at least one other group of allied health professionals, this prevents the inclusion of this module within the Athens Dietetics programme. This 20 credit module has therefore been replaced with two,10 credit modules Developmental Biology & Ageing and Integrating module 1. Both of these modules are existing QMU modules included within the Applied Pharmacology, Human Biology and Nutrition programmes and previously included within the QMU Dietetics programme before the introduction of IPE 1 and are still undertaken by the other existing QMU programmes.

Level 2 Again IPE 2 (20 credits) at level 2 has been removed for the same reasons given above. This has been replaced by repositioning and realigning the 10 credit level 3 module Public Health Practice and repositioning and realigning 10 credits of what was a 20 credit level 3 Professional Studies module. In realigning the Professional studies module to the aims and learning outcomes of level 2 the OSCE mode assessment has been removed from this module and replaced with a menu planning exercise. However in recognising the continued value of this mode of assessment an OSCE will be used and will replace what was a case based assignment component of the Therapeutic Dietetics module at level 3.

Level 3:

Due to the changes at level 2, it has been possible to include IPE 3 (20 credits) at level 3, which is an existing QMU School of Health Sciences module and Athens Physiotherapy module. This module has been previously considered that this better fitted the needs of Allied Health Professions working in Greece. It is anticipated that this module will be taught alongside the existing Athens Physiotherapy students. As detailed above the case based assignment component of the Therapeutic Dietetics module will be replaced with an OSCE.

Level 4:

It should be noted that no changes to the level 4 programme have been made.

In addition to the above, the following will also apply:

Level 1 and level 2 of the programme will be delivered in Greek and assessed in Greek

(which includes the Practice Placement Block A). Students will not be able to attend level 3 and 4 modules unless they provide a valid IELTS

certificate with a minimum score of 6.0 at the beginning of academic year 3. (Note IELTs certificates are only valid for2 years from the exam date) Level 3 will be taught in and assessed in English, with the exception of the placement block

B practice weeks which will be taught in Greek and assessed in Greek (portfolio element only). Level 4 will be taught and assessed in English, with the exception of the placement block C practice weeks which will be delivered in Greek and assessed in Greek (portfolio element only).

Texts to support modules during the first two years of study will also include Greek texts, given that it will be taught in the Greek medium. Relevant Greek professional, healthcare documents and standards will also be referred to in Level 2, 3 and 4 given that the Practice Placement blocks will take place within the Greek Healthcare setting.

The sequence of progression between levels is such that students must normally complete the modules of one level before proceeding to the next level in their programme. The Boards of Examiners in line with QMU Regulations may allow progression of a student to the next level who is yet to complete all modules from the preceding level. Such cases are carefully considered and subject to limits on the number of modules carried forward and still to be completed.

Detailed criteria and requirements for the passing of individual modules, including mechanisms for aggregation of different assessment elements, and arrangements for re-assessment are as set out in the published QMU regulations unless otherwise indicated within this document.

The existing range of exit qualifications is continued for the new award, each depending on the number and level of module credits achieved. In accordance with the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework, a series of exit awards can be gained. Precise details of credit and level requirements are laid down in QMU regulations, but in brief:

Completion of Level 1 Completion of Levels 1 & 2 Completion of Levels 1 - 3 Completion of Levels 1 - 4

: Certificate of Higher Education : Diploma of Higher Education : BSc Degree in Nutrition Studies : BSc Honours Degree in Dietetics

(SCQF Level 7) (SCQF Level 8) (SCQF Level 9) (SCQF Level 10)

Table 4.1: Proposed programme structure

Level 1

Semester

     

Cell Biology &

 

Developmental

Introduction to

1

Microbiology

Genetics

Biology &

Health Psychology

Biochemistry

(10 credits)

Human

(10 credits)

ageing

(10 credits)

(20 credits)

Physiology

(10 credits)

Semester

Key Investigative

(20 credits)

Introduction

 

Integrating

Health & Welfare

2

skills 1

to Food &

module 1

(Sociology)

(10 credits)

Nutrition

(10 credits)

(10 credits)

(10 credits)

 

Level 2

Semester

 

Molecular

 

Food Science

 

Human

Key Investigative

1

Biology

Nutrition

(10 credits)

Physiology &

Skills 2

(10 credits)

(20 credits)

Pharmacology

(10 credits)

Systems Biology

(20 credits)

Semester

(20 credits)

Immunology

Public Health

 

Professional

2

(10 credits)

Practice

studies 1

(10 credits)

(10 credits)

 

End of Level 2: 4 week placement Block (A) 0 academic credit (competency based learning pass/fail)

Level 3

Semester

         

Epidemiology

 

1

Therapeutic

& Health

Applied Nutrition

Clinical

Clinical

Dietetics

(10 credits)

IPE 3 (20 credits)

Semester

(20 credits)

Sciences 1

Sciences 2

(20 credits)

 

Professional

* Jointly taught

2

(20 credits)

(20 credits)

Studies 2

alongside

(10 credits)

physiotherapists

End of Level 3 12 week Placement Block (B)* (competency based learning pass/fail) Consolidation of practice & summative assessment occur in Semester 1 of Level 4

Level 4

Semester

Research

 

Honours Project (40 credits)

Research &

Placement B module-

1

Process

 

Communication

 

consolidation & academic

(10 credits)

(10 credits)

assessment (30 credits)

Semester

Placement C (competency based learning pass/fail) * includes consolidation of learning & summative assessment on

2

return to University (30 credits)

 

5.

Learning, teaching and assessment methods

Learning and teaching methods

As per the existing QMU programme, the learning and teaching strategies utilised by the AKMI programme aim to employ effective methods, while encouraging flexibility and innovation in meeting student requirements. Thus the student learning experience encompasses a variety of forms of learning/ teaching selected to be appropriate to the particular subject and level of the programme.

In recognising that this is an Honours Degree programme, the programme team will encourage and be expected to develop in students, critical and creative thinking along with the ability for independent work. Developing these attributes, which are at the core of SCQF Level 10, will enable graduates from the programme to continue to develop intellectually, taking responsibility for their own life-long learning appropriate to their career paths, which is a core feature of all professional benchmarking documents. To this end, student centred learning is an essential feature of the programme and will be introduced progressively through the levels, becoming predominant in later levels of the courses.

Such student-centred learning activities will vary in format and extent, taking into account the particular topic and the developmental stage of the student or cohort. At early stages they are likely to be undertaken within a framework designed largely by staff but progressively students and staff will negotiate learning targets and contracts. At later levels students are given greater freedom and responsibility to structure their own learning commitments through choices provided by module assessment options.

Formal lectures will have a role throughout the programme, especially in providing a framework for expected knowledge and concepts, as a more structured, staff-led delivery can make an important contribution to the achievement of learning objectives, particularly at earlier levels (1 & 2) than is the case at level 3 & 4. However these will be used alongside and integrated with participatory forms of learning/ teaching such as laboratory practicals, computer-based workshops, tutorials, problem based solving exercises, group work, directed and independent study, and group or individual presentations with an increasing emphasis on these modes of delivery in the latter stages of the programmes. This recognises that student participation is essential for them to be more actively engaged in the learning process and to encourage deeper learning.

Part time/visiting lecturers, who have the appropriate experience will contribute to the delivery of the modules, and will be appointed at the relevant stages of the programme eg in time for level 3. As a result, the core teaching team delivering the programme, along with visiting practitioners (for respective modules) and the external clinical supervisors/coordinators will reflect the necessary

breadth of clinical dietetic expertise.

 
 

The Programme Leader in liaison with the individual who co-ordinates the module will manage the proposed allocations of the part time/visiting lectures, ensuring that the latter, are contributing

correctly to the content and delivery of the module, with regards the learning outcomes

 

As students of health science, a key part of the curriculum is enquiry and research. Research awareness and ability are also important attributes of an Honours graduate, particularly in science- based degrees and for evidence-based practice. This theme begins in Level 1 where inputs on principles of investigation and data handling which help to develop basic understanding of the research process and begin to integrate formally concepts for example in microbiology with data handling derived from real experiments (integration of the modules microbiology, human physiology with key investigative skills 1). At all levels, references and research publications appropriate to the stage of learning are used to support students in lectures, tutorials, workshops and problem based exercises. These approaches encourage a research mindedness in students and the ability to critically evaluate research findings.

Various modules progressively develop laboratory and/or professional skills; practice in research/ professional communication and give further valuable experience in investigative techniques, problem solving, experimental design and analysis/ interpretation of data. These in turn support the Level 4 research project which involves experimental design, practical investigation and selection of methods of data collection/ analysis. The independent work required, the analysis and interpretation

of data and comparison of project findings with published work are combined with the rigour of writing a project report. Thus the project represents the culmination of a student’s individual research awareness and ability as an undergraduate.

The programme is also mindful of developing a professional graduate as well as a scientific one. In Level 1 (KIS module) students are introduced to the concepts that underpin Continuous Professional Development (CPD) and begin to develop a Personal Development Plan (PDP) This approach lays the foundation for Level 2 where the PDP is integrated into the Placement block A portfolio that students are required to complete and reflect on prior to Placement and subsequently maintain whilst on Placement A. it is subsequently continued at Levels 3 & 4 with preparation for subsequent Placement blocks B & C involving continued maintenance and reflection and whilst on Placements B & C students continue to extend the process of reflective practice.

Students will have the opportunity to develop both their personal and professional identities through the Key Investigative Skills module I (at Level 1) and the Professional Studies 1 module (at Level 2),

accordingly.

 

The learning and teaching strategies also include appropriate provision and employment of learning resources such as independent learning packs, library-based materials and web-based facilities (journals, databases etc). To support and encourage studies in general and student centred learning in particular, induction training in effective library usage and IT skills is provided at Level 1 within KIS 1. During the programme students will be encouraged and expected to access the University’s library resources and formal sessions on searching and database use will be integral to the module content in KIS1.

Details of learning/ teaching activities for each module are set out in module descriptors (see appendix I) and module student handbooks will be developed to provide students with all relevant

information on aims and objectives, content and materials and assessment procedures

. All key texts

and in particular those relating to research methods and process in the Level 4 research modules

will be done in due course and additions will be made where relevant

.

Specific learning strategies of note used within Dietetics Programme include:

Problem Based Learning (PBL) PBL within the Dietetics programme aims to develop in students’ logical, systematic thinking along with the ability to draw reasoned conclusions and sustainable judgements. PBL opportunities are utilised wherever possible; however in order to emphasise the importance of this process/skill and to facilitate the promotion of an integrative approach to the application of theory into practice in preparation for Placement B & C, formal timetabled PBL classes will occur in both Level 3 & 4. And the delivery will simultaneously involve both Dietetic and Clinical Sciences tutors, to encourage integration between these disciplines at these levels.

Reflection It is widely recognised that practising dietitians have the capacity for self reflection in order to advance professional practice. Reflection will therefore used as a learning and assessment technique (diagnostic, formative and summative) both within the academic and practice setting. Examples include: Self appraisal via completion of personal action/learning plans (KIS 1, Pre placement reports), reflective essays/summaries, reflective diaries, practice simulation debriefing, Inter professional education, reflective discussions, summaries within Placement blocks B and C.

Simulation In the context of the Dietetics programme simulation is a method whereby an artificial or hypothetical experience is created to engage students in activities that reflect real-life conditions but without the risk-taking consequences of an actual situation. It is a method that will be employed primarily within the academic setting and used for the development of practical skills. Examples include the teaching of anthropometric skills extracting relevant information from simulated medical notes within placement block A and several activities within therapeutic and professional studies which are built around simulated patients/scenarios (eg using simulated medical notes, documenting in case records, taking patient histories, role playing giving advice to individuals and groups, preparation for and the undertaking of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)).

Assessment methods

As per the existing QMU programme, the AKMI programme will incorporate a variety of assessment methods. These will include summative examinations ranging from MCQ tests or short answer formats to questions requiring discursive answers to assess knowledge and understanding of subject matter across the syllabus at a certain point in a programme. They will be used within the programme when considered appropriate, and proportionately more at earlier levels. Generally there is one assessment per 10 credit module unless there is a requirement for both theoretical and practical learning outcomes to be assessed.

Assessment methods other than examinations will also be used and will include essays, laboratory reports, activity logs, individual and group projects, research protocols, problem solving exercises, open-book exams, seminar and poster presentations, group assessment and peer review. It is anticipated that these will assess a range of different qualities and types of work confirming the development of the key knowledge and skill-mix in students. . Students will be given written details of their assessment schedule at the start of each academic year. To maximise learning from returned assignments students will be given written feedback on their work normally within 20 working days of submission. In addition, assessment performance in general, including examinations, will be discussed periodically with the personal academic tutor and forms the basis of the PDP in early levels.

Procedures will be in place for students with any special requirements for assessment including the use of a computer to write examinations, scribe or extended examination time as required. Any student can apply for extension to assignment deadlines for valid reasons (such as certificated illness).

Specific assessment methods of note used within the Dietetics programme include:

Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) As it is widely recognised that paper-based examinations are relatively poor in assessing skills, attitude and clinical reasoning, a skills-based practical examination will be included within the programme. This will be as a summative assessment with the Level three Therapeutic Dietetics module, positioned prior to the progression to the first substantive placement block (B).

Competency based assessment This is an evidence based form of assessment, where by students gather evidence within their portfolios (for placement blocks A, B, C) to demonstrate their competency in applying the relevant knowledge and skills in accordance with professional benchmarks/standards and which are reflective of the ability to successfully complete work activities within a range of situations/environments. It firmly places the responsibility for managing learning and assessment with students and embeds the professional requirement of maintaining a portfolio.

An overview of the assessment programme summarising the elements of assessment used in modules is given in the table below (Table 5.2). All elements of the indicative content are rigorously assessed at the appropriate points in the programme to ensure students have achieved the necessary level of knowledge and skill.

Table 5.2: Summary of assessment methods

 

Semester

Credits

Semester 1

Semester 2

 

Assessment

Assessment

Level 1

Biochemistry

1 & 2

20

Lab/ Webct (formative)

Lab Report (Mid S2 30%)

 

Written Exam (end S2, 70%)

Cell Biology & Genetics

1

10

MCQ exam (100%)

Developmental Biology & Ageing

1

10

Exam (100%)

Human Physiology

1 & 2

20

Short answer & MCQ exam (50%)

Exam (50%)

Intro to Food & Nutrition

2

10

MCQ (Formative)

 

Diet pack (100%)

Integrating module 1

2

10

Group Presentation (50%) &

 

group report (50%)

Key Investigative Skills 1

2

10

IT competence (formative) Written Exam – short answers

 

(100%)

Microbiology

1

10

Short answer & MCQ exam (100%)

Introduction to Health Psychology

1

10

MCQ exam (100%)

Health & Welfare (sociology)

2

10

Essay (100%)

Level 2

Human Physiology &

1 & 2

20

Exam-MCQ

Exam –short answers

Pharmacology

(50%)

(50%)

Systems Biology

1 & 2

20

MCQ (formative)

Lab Report (Mid S2 30%)

 

Examination (end S2, 70%)

Key Investigative Skills 2

1

10

Project report (100%)

Immunology

2

10

Exam

 

(100%)

Molecular Biology

1

10

Essay (100%)

Nutrition

1 & 2

20

MCQ

Exam

 

(formative)

(100%)

Public Health Practice

2

10

Essay (100%)

Food science

1

10

Exam

 

(100%)

Professional Studies 1

2

10

Practical cooking exam (60%) &

 

written summary (40%)

Placement Block A

2

0

Portfolio-Pass/Fail (100%)

Level 3

Clinical Sciences 1

1 & 2

20

Examination (50%) ¥

Examination

 

(50%) ^

Clinical Sciences 2

1 & 2

20

Examination (50%) ¥

Examination

 

(50%) ^

Applied Nutrition

1 & 2

20

Formative case presentations

Examination

 

(100%)

Professional Studies 2

2

10

Essay (100%)

Therapeutic Dietetics

1 & 2

20

OSCE beginning of Semester 2 (40%)

 

Examination end of semester (60%)

Epidemiology & Health

2

10

Report (data analysis) (100%)

Interprofessional Education

1&2

20

Group presentation (60%)

 

Individual reflective report (40%)

Level 4

Honours Project

2

40

Honours project (80%),

 

supervisors mark (20%)

Research Process

2

10

Research proposal (100%)

Research & Professional Communication

2

10

Abstract (20%) Press release (10%) Power point presentation

 

(70%)

Placement Block B

1

30

Portfolio assessment-Pass/Fail demonstrating competency in learning outcomes and integrated case study

 

(100%)

Placement Block C

2

30

 

Portfolio assessment-Pass/Fail demonstrating competency in learning outcomes and examination

(100%)

¥ Integrative assessment task for Clinical Sciences 1 and Clinical Sciences 2 modules, Examination (50%) summative at end of semester 1.^ Integrative assessment task for Clinical Sciences 1 and Clinical Sciences 2 modules, Examination (50%) summative at end of semester 2.

6. Placements

The management and delivery of placements will be carried out in accordance with QMU processes which are in line with the UK QAA Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education, Section 9: Work-based and placement learning – (2007) and the British Dietetic Association Curriculum Framework guidance (2008). In addition the AKMI Dietetics programme will endeavour to meet the EFAD Practice Placement Standards for Dietetics (2005). Appendix V(b) demonstrates in more detail how the QAA and EFAD standards are/or will be met by the AMC Dietetic programme

There are three periods of practical placement Block A, B and C (a four week placement early in the programme followed by two separate 12 week placements) in the programme.

These blocks are integrated with periods of academic education so that the students are able to apply knowledge and skills; to allow students to adequately reflect on and learn from each block and in order that progression through the academic and practical components of the programme can be demonstrated.

Aims and learning outcomes for the specific placement blocks are agreed and mirror those used by the existing QMU programme (These can be found in Appendix IV).

Students undertake a total of 1050 hours of practical training and experience throughout across the three placement blocks broken down as follows:

Placement Block A: 4 weeks (150 hours) Placement Block B: 12 weeks (450 hours) Placement Block C: 12 weeks (450 hours)

Students must work the statutory hours of a full time dietitian in a private or national Greek hospital as part of their clinical placement and it is expected that they will be given statutory and public holidays or time off in lieu. Significant time lost through sickness will have to be made up.

As per the existing QMU programme (which conforms to the BDA Curriculum guidance of 2008), two of the placement blocks (B & C) are of sufficient length to enable continuity of learning and demonstrate consistency of performance and case load management in an acute/clinical setting. One of the placement blocks(C) is undertaken close to the point of graduation.

The first placement block (Placement A) will occur early in the academic programme at the end of the second semester of level 2. It is deliberately placed between level 2 and 3 to introduce students to the role of the Dietitian in practice and raise awareness of the key knowledge and skills required. The placement will be split 50:50 between campus and the healthcare setting as per the existing

QMU programme. This is not a pass or fail placement, but it is expected that the hours and learning outcomes will be met.

The Placement block A, practice weeks will be undertaken in both acute and community settings. Such as a hospital, continuing care hospital, nursing home with some opportunity for the student to work in an institutional food production unit. It would ideally be in a hospital, either acute or continuing care, to be able to appreciate the process of meal selection, service and delivery of meals, but some of the other specific aims could be met in a more general catering unit.

The second placement block (Placement B) commences at the end of Semester 2 of level 3. Its aim is to build on the previous practice placement experience and to allow students to begin to demonstrate their ability to apply the knowledge and skills learnt within level 3. This placement block involves a period of consolidation, reflection and summative assessment on return to AMC in Semester 1 of Level 4.

The Placement block B will offer experience in a range of settings which could include acute hospital wards and outpatients, practitioners’ offices or health centres (Greek equivalent as appropriate), health clubs, patients’ homes and nursing/residential homes. The programme could also include non-health settings such as schools, established community groups and should offer some public health/health promotion experience.

The final placement block (Placement C) commences at the beginning of Semester 2 of level 4 close to the point of graduation. This placement again continues to build and develop practice with more complex groups/individuals and allows students to demonstrate competency in relation to the Standards of Proficiency. It is again followed by consolidation, reflection and a summative assessment on return to QMU in Semester 1 of Level 4.

The Placement block C will offer experience in a range of settings which could include acute hospital wards and outpatients, GP surgeries/health centres, patients’ homes and nursing/residential homes. The programme should include non-health settings such as schools, established community groups and offer public health/health promotion experiences.

The BSc (Hons) Dietetics – Athens programme therefore also conforms to EU guidelines (EFAD, 2010), that where practical components are proposed they should occur within a minimum of two different settings eg

a) Where individuals or groups are healthy and well, eg schools, workplace b) Where individuals or groups are unwell, eg clinics, hospitals

AMC collaborates with large private general hospitals, rehabilitation centres, dietetic clinics as well as private dietetic offices for the implementation of the placements (See appendix VI for further details). AMC has an adequate network of partners in the private health sector both in Athens and Thessaloniki, since it has been providing health education programs for the last 7 years both at diploma but also at the undergraduate level. In addition to current partnerships already in effect (such as with the Filoktitis Recovery & Rehabilitation centre), further negotiations are under way with potential partners (Private practitioners, health clubs, retirement/residential homes, catering departments and a further private hospital that includes three separate clinics, including a General Hospital, a Maternity/Gynecological Clinic, and a Children’s Hospital) in order for AMC to be in a position to fully meet the requirements of the programme (children, adults and older people, healthy population, as well as clinical cases).

AMC will follow the dietetic placement allocation policy which is established by QMU. This policy explains to students how placements are applied for and allocated. This policy and additional relevant information (eg overview of placement system, regulations, information on practice providers, placement sites, aims, objectives relevant paperwork, allocation process, student testimonials, mentoring) is available via the e-learning platform moodle and the registry.

Formal pre placement tutorials will occur prior to each placement block and portfolios and/or portfolio information will be issued to students prior to each of these blocks. These sessions address the nature of the placement block and the learning outcomes to be achieved, the assessment procedures (including regulations and action taken in the case of failure), the timings and duration of the placement experience and associated records to be maintained (reports, portfolios),

expectations of professional conduct, the need for confidentiality, communication and lines of responsibility.

Practice placement portfolios do exist for each of the placement blocks and these will be issued at the time of the pre placement tutorials along with guidance on the purpose, structure and content.

A pre placement report for each of the placement blocks (completed jointly by the student and their PAT) will be sent to the relevant Practice Provider prior to each placement block. The role of the PAT will extend into the Practice Placement setting with students being made aware that this individual is available to be contacted at any time during the placement. PAT’s also formally follow up students whilst on placement (Blocks B & C) initially by telephone call to the Practice Provider and then by visit if requested by either the Practice Provider or student or deemed appropriate by the Programme Leader. The Programme Leader provides support for non-registered staff where appropriate.

Students will be appointed a Lead and/or Supervisory Dietitian in the practice setting. In addition the use of Mentors within the practice setting will be encouraged to provide students with additional on site support (Similar to University PAT role)

Overall responsibility for the supervision and assessment of students on placement is undertaken by an experienced dietitian with training in supervision and assessment (this will be provided by AMC). They are normally responsible for ensuring the student receives a half way assessment (for B and C) and a final assessment at the end of each of the placement blocks (A, B, C). This dietitian is also responsible for the final assessment of the student, which includes completing a joint report at the end of each placement block and returning this to AMC.

As part of Interprofessional Health Principles, other appropriately qualified health and social care professionals may contribute to the assessment of and provide evidence for the achievement of particular placement outcomes.

All placements are approved and the quality actively monitored by AMC according to QMU’s guidelines (see appendix VIII). The criteria against which placements will be approved and monitored has been adapted from QMU’s existing policy to fit AMC’s purposes. Health and safety and policies for equality and diversity will be addressed as part of these processes (See appendix VIII for further information). Annual risk assessment reporting will also be completed for all Health Boards.

As part of this process students complete an evaluation form for each placement and these are reviewed as part of the ongoing approval and monitoring process.

AMC in accordance to QMU regulations will require students to wear Uniforms/Lab coats (as necessary where required) in the clinical placements of the programme.

  • 7. Admission criteria

A summary of the admission criteria is given below.

Typical entry:

Admissions to the course are carried out by a selection committee consisting of the Director of the College, the Programme Leader and selected course tutors. Final decisions are made by the selection committee.

Candidates must be at least 18 years of age in the year of entry. This is the age of graduation from secondary education. All Applicants should have a Lyceum certificate. Admissions staff will focus on Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Essay Writing grades as more relevant to the course. They also have to provide two references by two Lyceum tutors concerning their performance and diligence in the above modules.

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL)

All other candidates who do not come from secondary education, like professionals without undergraduate studies or other special cases, will be evaluated by the Director of the College, the Course Leader, the members of the Course Committee, and final approval will be given by QMU.

We explicitly state that other qualifications and including the IVT diploma qualification will be mapped against the SCQF framework and curriculum content of the Dietetics programme and as

such will be dealt with on a case by case basis with credit being given if relevant.

 

All applicants should submit the proposed BSc (Hons) Dietetics - Athens application form (see Appendix X) completed to the Admissions Office of AKMI Metropolitan College in order to be sent to the QMU Records.

Equal Opportunities

AMC is committed to the provision

of

a policy

of equal opportunity in student selection.

All

applicants regardless of race, ethnic origins, religion, gender, sexual orientation, marital status or age, can expect equal treatment.

Queen Margaret University is firmly committed to the Widening Access to Higher Education, and Teachability agendas, and the QMU Dietetics Subject Area welcomes applications from disabled individuals. The Athens programme will be in line with this philosophy and aims to improve the support in more cases of disabled than today in the next few years.

English language requirements.

On admission to the programme “Applicants must be able to communicate in English to the standard equivalent of level 5.0 of the International English Language Testing System (IELTS)”

The first two years of the programme will be taught and assessed in Greek and that the 3 rd and 4 th year of the programme will be taught and assessed in English. Students’ competence in English should be of IELTS (score 6) or equivalent, in order to progress into the 3 rd year. Students will not be able to attend level 3 and 4 modules unless they provide a valid IELTS certificate with a minimum score of 6.0 at the beginning of academic year 3. (Note IELTs certificates are only valid for 2 years from the exam date)

Students are obliged to attend the preparative English Language classes and since IELTS score 6 or equivalent certificate is a QMU prerequisite:

The HPC Standards of Proficiency for Dietitians (2007) for entry to the profession (HPC, SOP 1b.3) state that at the point of entry to the register applicants must be able to communicate in English to the standard equivalent to level 7 of the International English Language Testing System, with no element below 6.5.

Criminal Conviction Checks

Applicants with serious criminal convictions, notable those convicted of violence, sexual or drug offences, may be excluded from programmes as they may be unable to undertake certain clinical education placements or find employment on completion of the programme. Exclusion should not however be automatic. Most ex-offenders are essentially law-abiding citizens and will not re-offend. In reaching a decision about an applicant, therefore, programme teams are asked to take into account the age, nature and relevancy of the conviction, the applicants’ attitude to it and his or her achievements since the conviction. Dependent on the case students may be admitted to the programme, but would be informed that, subsequent progression to practice placements and successful registration with the HPC via the International route cannot be guaranteed.Students will be responsible for and required to declare any criminal convictions during their period of registration. All applicants will be obliged to complete and sign the criminal convictions sector in the application form.

Health Screening

All students admitted to the programme will undergo a formal Health Screen underpinned by an official medical certificate signed by a physician clarifying that they do not suffer from an infectious

disease. Students are also advised that any changes in health that occur during the programme between these time points should be notified to the Programme Leader.

NB Students will be made aware on admission

that where necessary and relevant any such

information regarding health or criminal records may be disclosed to relevant third parties eg Practice Providers.

8. Regulations

Normal QMU regulations and appeals processes as detailed in Appendix III will apply. In addition the following programme specific regulations will apply:

  • 8.1 Programme specific academic regulations:

    • 8.1.1 International English Language Testing System (IELTS): A valid IELTS certificate with

minimum score of 6 submitted at the enrolment week of level 3 is a prerequisite in order the student

to progress on this level and level 4 of studies. Bsc (Hons) Dietetics [Athens] students will not be able to attend level 3 and level 4 modules unless they provide a valid* IELTS certificate with minimum score 6 at the beginning of the academic year 3. * It should be noted that an IELTS certificate is only valid for 2 years from the exam date.

  • 8.1.2 Whilst students may be allowed to progress from level 1 to 2 and 2 to 3 carrying core modules

as per QMU regulations, students will not normally be allowed to proceed to placement Block B without having passed all core modules.

  • 8.1.3 Students are not allowed to progress from Placement Block B to C without having achieved all

of the learning outcomes for Placement B.

  • 8.1.4 Students are not permitted to undertake the summative assessment of the B or C placement

module without having passed the relevant placement itself.

  • 8.1.5 Students are required to normally attend at least

80% of the teaching

hours for each

academic module. Otherwise, students will not be allowed respective module.

to

sit

for the examination

of

the

  • 8.1.6 Students who are registered for the BSc(Hons) in Dietetics and whose first language is not

English and/or Greek, are not permitted the allocation of extra time in examinations.

 
 
  • 8.1.7 All students whose first language is not English and/or Greek will normally be permitted to use

language-only dictionaries in examinations.

Electronic dictionaries are not permitted (please refer to

Exam Regulations section).

 
  • 8.2 Programme specific placement regulations:

    • 8.2.1 Extended training after failure to achieve a satisfactory standard in Placement

Block B and Placement C:

In order to pass Placement B and Placement C, the student must have satisfied the dietitian in charge of training that they have demonstrated competence in each learning outcome. In the event of failure to achieve a satisfactory standard at the end of Placement B or Placement C the student and the AKMI University tutor must each be informed of the reasons for the failure. The final assessment should be undertaken at the end of the placement and before the student leaves the placement in order that adequate feedback can be given. A student cannot fail the placement before s/he completes the full 12 weeks.

Failure of Placement Block B:

If a student fails to demonstrate competence in more than 6 learning outcomes they must

repeat the whole 12 weeks. If a student fails to demonstrate competence in up to 6 learning outcomes they should repeat a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 6 weeks of the placement, depending on the number of

learning outcomes failed. The actual length of extended training required is to be decided in consultation with the Practice Provider, the AKMI University tutor and External Examiner where relevant. The extended placement must be undertaken in a centre approved for either Placement B or

Placement C. If a student fails to demonstrate competence in all learning outcomes at the end of the extended training, they must repeat the whole placement.

Failure of Placement Block C:

If the student fails to demonstrate competence in more than 4 learning outcomes they must

repeat the whole 12 weeks. If the student fails to demonstrate competence in up to 4 learning outcomes they must

undertake a minimum of 4 weeks and a maximum of 6 weeks extended training to be decided in consultation with the Practice Provider, AKMI University tutor and External Examiner where relevant. The extended placement must be undertaken in a centre approved for either Placement B or Placement C. Failure of the extended training will result in the student having to repeat the whole placement.

NB Any designated placement block may normally only be repeated once.

8.2.2 Extended training after failure to complete Placement Block B or Placement Block C due to absence:

Students must normally attend 100% of the allocated hours for each placement block requirement (A, B and C). However where this is not the case absences will be dealt with as follows:

Placement Block A (refers to both campus and practice weeks):

Loss of up to 2 placement days: No action needs to be taken if the Clinical Educator and University consider that there is no detrimental effect on the student’s progress, ie they have met all of the learning outcomes for that placement. If this is not the case the lost time must be made up.

Loss of more than 2 placement days: Students should normally make up any additional days beyond the 2 day threshold (ie they should normally complete a minimum of 18 days). No action needs to be taken beyond this if the Clinical Educator and University consider there is no detrimental effect to the student’s progress ie they have or will meet all of the learning outcomes. If this is not the case then the rest of the lost time should be made up.

Placement Block B or C:

If the student misses some of Placement Block B or C due to absence, e.g. sickness, the following action is normally taken:-

Loss of 5 placement days no action needs to be taken if the Practice Provider considers that

there is no detrimental effect on the student’s progress, i.e. they have demonstrated competence in all the learning outcomes for that placement. If this is not the case the lost time must be made up. Loss of more than 5 the student must complete a minimum of 11 weeks, placement days lost time must be made up to 11 weeks. No action needs to be taken beyond this if the Practice Provider considers that there is no detrimental effect on the student’s progress, i.e. they have demonstrated competence in all the learning outcomes. If this is not the case the rest of the lost time should be made up.

If a student requires a prolonged period of absence from their placement, the period of practical training required will be determined in consultation with the Practice Provider and University Tutor.

  • 9. Student support

Personal Academic Tutor (PAT)

AMC will operate a system for student support in academic and pastoral matters. Each student will be assigned a member of staff from the Subject Area as a personal academic tutor within the first month of matriculating in level 1. These tutors will support the student through the length of their studies unless a particular request to change PAT is instigated by the student. Students are invited to meet their PAT at

least once a semester to discuss progress. This is particularly important in the first year of any programme. The PATs can advise their students about their studies and help out with problems. Students can contact their PAT at any time when they need support but are also expected to respond to any request made if contacted by their PAT. It should be noted that within the Dietetic Programme the PAT system also extends out to the Practice Setting, with the PAT being the first point of contact for any personal problems experienced by students on placement.

Student Staff Consultative Committee (SSCC) Student Staff meetings will be organised by the Programme Leader and Administration of AMC at time mutually convenient to staff and students. These will enable issues from module, placement delivery and other general University-wide issues to be discussed. These meetings will be held once per Semester. Student representatives are encouraged to Chair and take minutes of these meetings where practical ways of resolving problems are openly discussed. They are also encouraged to make suggestions on how to improve their individual.

Programme Committee (PC)

Student representatives and academic staff from the Dietetics programme will meet formally at the PC to address issues of mutual interest, discuss and propose programme changes; discuss programme

reports and other documentation.

These SSCC and PC committees will be serviced by the AMC Registry of the Programme who will circulate documentation for meetings and record minutes of meetings to members.

AMC will strongly encourage students to become student representatives pursuant to AKMI guidelines – it is a valuable experience and, in addition to them influencing programme issues, it contributes to their CV and employment references later. Students will have access to the QMU Class Representative Handbook in order to be able to fully engage in this additional role.

Central Support services

The many support services for students, including the counselling service, financial advisors, academic

learning centre and others are all detailed in the student handbooks.

10.Resources

Learning Resource Centre (LRC)

Electronic services are available to students via the library web pages off- campus, via Remote Access. AMC support the academic procedure via the electronic learning platform Moodle. This facility also allows access to their desktop to provide the program access they would have on campus.

Educational Resources

Since 2004-05, AKMI Metropolitan College (Athens campus) has been housed in its campus in Maroussi.

Teaching facilities

The space is distributed as follows in the Maroussi campus:

1 library and adjoining reading room and internet access area

2 specialised clinical practice laboratories for SLT studies

1 computer engineering laboratory (for Computer Engineering students)

2 computer laboratories

offices for staff and administrators

registries for each different programme

1 board room for staff meetings

1 auditorium (capacity 200 students)

8 teaching rooms with overhead projectors that seat between 25 & 30 students each

1 students’ coffee lounge

The auditorium is supplied with a multimedia projector and further advanced audiovisual facilities. Each teaching room is equipped with one multimedia projector and one PC, while mobile multimedia and overhead projectors are availiable to tutors upon request. In addition, all PCs have access to internet.

The computer labs are equipped with state-of-the-art computers (35 PCs in total) with the following characteristics:

Hardware information:

Pentium 4 3.4 GHz 2GB RAM HDD 160GB SATA II DVD RW 16x VGA NVIDIA 6600 256MB TFT monitor 17’’

Software information

All computers are equipped with all necessary software applications (e.g. application development packages, database development packages, CASE Tools, multimedia development applications etc.) and a high-speed internet connection.

Library resources

AMC houses one library and study room, which are located on campus. The library is stocked with a large variety of books, journals, magazines, and reference reading material in relation to the programmes offered by the College. Students may borrow books from the library for study purposes.

The stock of the library is currently designed principally to meet the specific needs of the courses currently offered. Thus it cannot properly be compared to a full library in an established British tertiary education institution. There are considerable short-comings in the areas of general literature and there is limited provision of academic journals and periodicals. However, serious attempts are being made towards the enrichment of the library stock, so that students can have substantial learning support from library material on campus.

The current stock of the Athens campus Library is:

 

Approximate

Periodicals

CD

number of titles

and

ROMs

 

Journals

 

4,880

90

50

Note: Copies

of the majority of the titles are also available. The CD ROMs refer to student’s

dissertations.

The AMC library is open from Mondays to Fridays, from 9a.m. till 9p.m and every Saturday from 10a.m to 2p.m.

Study Room facilities: The main body of the library includes 6 study areas each of which can accommodate a maximum of 6 students. In addition, there is an Internet access area.

Specialist Resources

A number of specialist resources such as professional tests, audio/visual equipment, and relevant educational material are available to teaching staff and students in order to support the needs of the programmes.

Specialised computer software:

SPSS 17.0 (for statistical analyses)

e-Diet and Nutritionist Pro Diet Analysis/Diet Analysis Plus (the later to be provided at the

end of level 2)

Specialist Rooms/ Laboratory Facilities

AMC has 2 microbiology laboratories, one food laboratory, and a confectionery preparatory laboratory in the campus in the centre of Athens. All laboratories are equipped with laptops and projectors.

List of Equipment

  • (A) General laboratory equipment

White coats, disposable gloves, face masks Digital Macropipettes (and disposable tips) (Eppendorf - 5 and 10mL) Manual fixed volume macropipettes (1 and 5mL) Digital Micropipettes (and disposable tips) (Gilson – 1-100μL, 1-200 μL, 200-1000 μL) Plastic disposable transfer pipettes Glass and plastic beakers (range of sizes) Glass and plastic funnels (range of sizes) Narrow and wide mouth glass Erlenemeyer flasks and clear glass shake flasks Glass volumetric flasks Glass and disposable test tubes Sterile, disposable centrifuge tubes Disposable sample containers Disposable plastic sample bags Clear and amber glass graduated media bottles with screw caps Flint and amber glass bottles with glass droppers Graduated glass, plastic and polypropylene cylinders (range of sizes) Digital and precision top loading balances and balance scales with draftshield (min 0.1μg) Slow speed magnetic stirrer and Magnetic stirrer hotplates Vortex mixer Bench-top centrifuges (including max speed 12-14.000g) Floor centrifuge (max speed 20-22.000 rpm – 8x50, 6x95, 4x160mL) Digital bench autoclave Thermostatically controlled water bath (and thermometer) pH meter (with pH standards) Microscopes (light 1200x, phase-contrast 2500x, fluorescence) Spectrophotometers (polystyrene and UV transparent cuvettes) Laminar flow hoods Fridge and freezer (-20°C)

  • (B) Biology/microbiology laboratory equipment

Respirometer Spirometer Analytical equipment laboratory including a gas chromatography machine and an atomic absorption

spectrometer Columns for chromatography (gel filtration, ion exchange, affinity) Polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis system (including tank, combs, plates, spacers, casting device) Horizontal gel electrophoresis apparatus and DNA visualization system (U.V. transilluminator for ethidium bromide) Power supply Genes in a bottle kit (Bio Rad) Biosafety Cabinets/Tissue Culture Hoods Glass microscope slides Culture media prep / isolation of pure culture Disposable swabs and Inoculating loop Bunsen burners Clear glass Burets with stop cock and dust cap Microplate reader with printer and 96-well format plate reader Disposable cell culture plates

  • (C) Food science laboratory equipment

Body composition analysers Digital healthcare scales Calipers for body fat measurement Dietetics software Food pyramids and samples of servings for both solids and liquids

Cooking facilities (including oven, microwave, extractor fans and wash up area) Basic cooking utensils (including stainless steel saucepan, frying pan etc.) Kitchen utensils (including plates, bowls, cutlery, scissors, wooden utensils for stirring etc.) Moisture analyser scales Mixers, Liquidisers and mashing tools Measuring cups (range of sizes) Oven thermometer (in protective jacket) Refractometer Cutting boards

11.Staff

Academic Staffing Complement

The Athens programme will be delivered by 3 Clinical Dietitians, 2 biologists/biochemists, 1 medical doctor, 1 health psychologist, and 1 mathematitian. Each tutor will be available to see students at pre-determined office hours for at least 2hrs per week. εβδομαδιαίως. Key people have been appointed as an interim measure and as years progress more tutors will be involved.

All subject areas will be taught by staff with relevant subject and specialist knowledge and expertise. Relevant aspects of teaching are carried out by dietitians and other healthcare professionals who are active in practice, relevant to the area being taught (see Teaching Staff CVs’ document)

The Educational Organisation AKMI owns two lifelong learning educational institutions, KEK AKMI & EEO GROUP which materialize programmes by E.U. for the adult education. In the frameworks of these programmes materialization, the organization’s tutors have attended programmes delivered by the Greek Ministry of Education and E.U. whose aim was to educate and familiarize them with the latest pedagogic methods of adult education.

AMC staff is in constant communication with QMU colleagues in order to deliver the programme in the best possible way and in accordance to QMU educational philosophy. Staff will be up-to-date with QMU educational procedures and the relevant required actions (including any necessary forms or pro-formas) that staff and/or students need to take in order to ensure that these procedures are indeed being followed.

The Dietetics Subject Area staffing complement in disciplines other than Dietetics, Nutrition or Biological Sciences is supported from within the Physiotherapy and Psychology programmes for disciplines such as Psychology and Sociology.

Learning and Teaching

The AMC Programme Team have a commitment to incorporate up to date learning and teaching methods and recognising that this is essential to ensure the SCQF graduate attributes are developed and supported in a diverse student cohort. The teaching staff of Athens programme in accordance of QMU academic strategy is experienced; and will follow QMU practises.

The QMU Centre for Academic Practice will provide support and schedule seminars at relevant points to ensure the Programme Team are familiar with the relevant learning, teaching and assessment methods, in addition to providing familiarisation with the role and remit of the various Programme Committees.

The AMC programme Team is also cognisant of the benefits of developments in e-technology that can widen accessibility in the curriculum and which is a key strategy of QMU (QELTA). Embracing the virtual learning environments as a tool for facilitating learning also assists in supporting students on practice placement to enhance learning through their reflective discussions and this will be achieved through via AMC’s e- learning platform Moodle.

Specific Student Support

The AMC dietetic programme will follow existing QMU guidelines in order to increase accessibility to the courses, facilities and learning materials within the subject area and this will be considered from the application phase and beyond for AMC students. Before entry, applicants will be invited to contact staff to discuss any needs which may require support; this includes students with disability to ascertain mobility requirements to all AMC facilities. Staff will also be proactive in approaching students at induction and whose performance on discussion with staff indicates possible undiagnosed conditions. This procedure is followed by QMU and has had very positive results, therefore AMC will be aligned with this.

AMC according to QMU policy moderates the academic process of specific students needs in order to ascertain whether additional time in examinations, permission to record lectures, provision of written notes on Moodle which also facilitates the employment of specific software for students with learning needs or other specific support is required (eg CD copies of course material).

QMU requires that all lecture/tutorial materials will be available on Moodle at least one week before the sessions concerned. This is considered to be of tremendous benefit to all students, as well as enhancing the learning environment for those with specific support needs and AMC will continue this policy.

12.Programme management

The Programme Leader (Dr Stavroula Stoupi) has operational responsibility for the quality of the programme in Athens, who must have communication and support from her counterpart in QMU, for the smooth delivery of the programme. The QMU staff will convene the exam boards for progression and awards and joint boards for the review of the previous academic year and proposing the necessary improvements and developments. Furthermore, the Programme Leader has day to day responsibility for the operational management of the programme. In terms of the student fitness to practice issues and any other placement issues that may arise, those will be dealt by the Placement Co-ordinator (Dr Glykeria Psarra) at the first instance and if necessary will involve the Programme Leader.

Programme Committee

The key activities of the Programme committee will include the development of mechanisms to ensure student feedback; review academic regulations, admissions & policy statements, review assessment instruments used; develop teaching and learning methods, and report its activity within the Annual Monitoring Report which is submitted to QMU before the start of the academic year. Any changes in module delivery or assessment will initially be submitted to the AMC programme committee for approval and then forwarded to QMU for approval via the School Academic Board (SAB)

The Student Staff Committee

This committee ensures an adequate and effective opportunity for discussion between students and staff, in a context that allows wide student participation.

The function of the Committee is to provide a forum for constructive discussion of the programme in general terms; the demands of the programme on students, and of possible developments. It also identifies any issues which may hinder the student learning experience. The Committee will consider any matters directly related to the programme and report or make recommendations as felt necessary to the Programme Committee.

The membership of the SSCC will be drawn from staff teaching on the programme and student representatives; there should be more students than staff. The student membership will cover each level of the dietetic programme, according to QMU procedures.

Module co-ordinators

The module coordinator is a key individual in ensuring appropriate management of academic programmes. They have responsibility for ensuring, in discussion with the Programme Leader, that

sufficient resources are available to individual modules. The AMC coordinators (will in liaison where necessary with their QMU counterparts) maintain the currency of the curriculum content for individual modules and are responsible for the assessment of the module including the preparation of examination papers and submission of marks to the exam board. They will also evaluate the operation of the module (student evaluations) and contribute to the evaluation of the programmes of which the module forms a part (annual monitoring report).

13.Quality assurance procedures

The AMC Dietetics programme will conform to existing QMU Quality assurance procedures at both a module level (module evaluations) and at a programme level (Student-Staff consultative committee, programme committee, external examiner feedback, annual monitoring report).

Module and Placement Evaluation

In order to evaluate the quality of individual modules, the AMC appointed module co-ordinators will be responsible for undertaking module evaluations (and placement evaluations where applicable). The process for this will confer to existing QMU processes where alternative AMC processes do not exist

Student representatives

A key mechanism in the QMU quality assurance process is ensuring that student feedback is formally recognised and that a system by which the opinion of the students on QMU programmes through identifying student representatives exists. The AMC Dietetics programme will also adopt this process and during the initial weeks of level one, the appointed Programme Leader will introduce the rationale behind the election of student representatives for each level of the programme. Students will be asked to put forward two representatives to the Programme Leader who will then outline their responsibility and the mechanisms for informing the academic (and other) staff of issues affecting students on the Dietetics degree programme. They can approach teaching staff on behalf of their class or raise unresolved issues at the relevant programme committee (Student Staff Consultative Committee and the Programme Committee).

External Examiners

To ensure the ongoing quality of AMC Dietetics programme, fairness in assessment procedures and the appropriateness of the curriculum, samples of work at levels 1 & 2 of the AKMI programme will be scrutinised by the relevant module co-ordinators at QMU. In addition an external examiner, who will normally be an HPC Registered Dietitian will be appointed by QMU to scrutinise the academic work at levels 3 & 4 of the programme. The nominated external examiner will be proposed by QMU and approved at the QMU School Academic Board. Normally their term will be four years although (unusually) an extension to this term may be permitted. The nature of advice offered by the external examiner is independent, objective and they can be consulted on a number of matters to draw on their professional experience. In order to monitor effectiveness of the programme, currency of the content and appropriateness of the assessment procedures and quality of the feedback provided, the external examiner will submit an annual report to the QMU Quality Enhancement Unit (QEU).

Annual Monitoring

The Annual monitoring exercise is a crucial element of QMU’s quality assurance and enhancement mechanisms. The annual monitoring of programmes ensures that learning aims and outcomes are being met, and that the curriculum and assessment strategy continue to be effective. If this is not the case then the process allows the appropriate actions to remedy and identify shortcomings. AMC will therefore submit an annual monitoring report to QMU (which will be written by the AMC Programme leader in consultation with the programme team), which takes account of the module evaluation exercises. This report will be submitted to and approved by the AMC Programme Committee before forwarding to the Quality Enhancement Unit (QEU) at QMU. Following this. Any issues identified are then brought to the attention of the School Academic Board (SAB) and where necessary will be acted upon.

14.References

The British Dietetic Association (BDA)- Dietetic Career Framework (for entry level) 2008 (incorporates NHS knowledge and Skills Framework 2004)

European Federation of Dietetic Associations (EFAD) - European Dietetic Benchmark Statement for the education and training of Dietitians throughout Europe (2005)

European Federation of Dietetic Associations (EFAD) - European Practice Placement Standards for Dietetics (2010)

The British Dietetic Association Code of Professional Conduct (2008)

Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) Level Descriptors

The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) for Higher Education Benchmarking Statements- Dietetics

(2001)

The QAA Code of Practice; Section 9: Work-based and placement learning (2007)

Official Government Gazette F.E.K. (of the H.R.)/O.G.G Presidential Decree No 311

Farajian, P. et al (2011) Very high childhood obesity prevalence and low adherence rates to the Mediterranean diet in Greek children: The GRECO study. Atherosclerosis, In Press.

Tzotzas, T. et al (2008) Epidemiological survey for the prevalence of overweight and abdominal obesity in Greek adolescents. Obesity (Silver Spring).Jul;16(7):1718-22.

APPENDIX I - Module Descriptors

APPENDIX II – Members of the Planning Team

Dr Stavroula Stoupi

Dr Glykeria Psarra

Vasiliki Grigoriou Dr Maria Nefeli Nikolaidou-Katsaridou Dr Georgia Levidou Vesna Cavka – Alabassinis Tatiana Xenou

Programme Leader - Clinical Dietician & Nutritionist (BSc, MSc, PhD) Placement Co-ordinator - Clinical Dietician & Nutritionist (BSc, MSc, PhD) Tutor - Clinical Dietitian & Nutritionist (BSc, MSc) Tutor - Biologist (BSc, MSc, PhD) Tutor - MD, MSc, PhD Tutor - Mathematician (BSc, MSc) Tutor - Health Psychologist (BSc, MSc)

Dr Sara Smith- Programme Leader – Dietetics Queen Margaret University

APPENDIX III – Assessment Regulations

APPENDIX III – Assessment Regulations ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS PART A POLICY AND PRINCIPLES 1.0 General provision for

ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS

PART A POLICY AND PRINCIPLES

  • 1.0 General provision for assessment

  • 2.0 Context

  • 3.0 The purpose of assessment

  • 4.0 Principles of assessment

  • 5.0 Fairness, reliability and validity of assessment

  • 6.0 Forms of assessment

PART B AWARD REGULATIONS

  • 7.0 Marks, grades and levels of performance

  • 8.0 Award

  • 9.0 Decision on award classification in borderline cases (undergraduate degrees)

    • 10.0 Decision on an award in absence of complete assessment information

    • 11.0 Withdrawing from a module

    • 12.0 Transcripts

PART C ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS

  • 13.0 Terminology

  • 14.0 Programme regulations

  • 15.0 Assessment of a module

  • 16.0 Decisions on student progression

  • 17.0 Reassessment

  • 18.0 Repeating a module

  • 19.0 Assessment of disabled students and of students whose first language is not English

  • 20.0 Penalties for word limits and late submission of assessment

PART D RESPONSIBILITIES AND EXPECTATIONS

  • 21.0 Student responsibilities in assessment

  • 22.0 Responsibility of other individuals and bodies in assessment

  • 23.0 Project supervision

  • 24.0 Academic dishonesty and plagiarism

PART E APPENDICES

Undergraduate Grade Marking Criteria Postgraduate Grade Marking Criteria

PART A 15.POLICY AND PRINCIPLES

  • 1.0 General provision for assessment and awards

  • 1.1 The authority for approving programmes and granting awards rests with the Senate of Queen Margaret University. Senate is also responsible for maintaining the academic standards of these awards. One of the major mechanisms for the assurance of academic standards is the assessment of students. These regulations provide the structure within which students shall be assessed and whereby their assessment contributes to the achievement of the award.

  • 1.2 These General Assessment Regulations shall govern all taught programmes which lead to a University award except where Senate shall determine otherwise.

  • 1.3 Each student is enrolled on a programme and is subject to the regulations of that programme, which in its turn is subject to the University’s overall policy and regulations.

  • 1.4 An award will be conferred upon satisfaction of the following conditions:

the candidate was a registered student of the University at the time of his or her

assessment and has fulfilled all financial obligations to the University; the candidate has completed a programme approved by the University as leading to

the award being recommended; the award has been recommended by a Board of Examiners convened, constituted and acting under regulations approved by Senate.

  • 1.5 Senate is the ultimate authority in the University for the ratification of academic decisions and may, in extreme circumstances over-rule a Board of Examiners. It will normally refer matters of concern back to the Board of Examiners for reconsideration.

  • 1.6 Acting within the above principles, a Board of Examiners will exercise its judgement in reaching decisions on individual candidates. It is responsible for interpreting the assessment regulations for the programme, in the light of the University's requirements and good practice in higher education and its academic judgement should not lightly be questioned or overturned.

  • 1.7 Appeals by students against the decisions of Boards of Examiners shall be subject to University procedures and practices, as set out in section of the Governance and Regulations dealing with Academic Appeals and Student Complaints and in the University Student Diary and Handbook.

  • 2.0 Context

  • 2.1 The strategy for the Quality Enhancement of Learning, Teaching and Assessment (QELTA) is the key strategy for the delivery of taught programmes of study at QMU and this assessment policy should be read in conjunction with the QELTA strategy.

  • 2.2 Assessment is integral to the design of programmes of study leading to the award of academic credit and to the award of degrees and diplomas. Programme content is specified through regulations governing Programme Development, Modification, Monitoring and Review. In particular, the learning outcomes and assessment strategy for any programme are defined by a Programme Specification.

  • 2.3 Assessment is the process of forming a judgment about the quality and extent of learning in relation to the intended learning outcomes of a student’s programme of study. In view of the variety of programmes, it is recognised that there is a need for a variety of forms of assessment, which should reflect the aims of that programme of study and the mode of study. Whatever the type of assessment, it should be fair, valid, reliable, useful and transparent.

2.4

In addition to its role in relation to the maintenance of academic standards, an equally important function of assessment is to develop effective student learning. In this context it is essential that assessment is both integrated into the learning experience and that it motivates the learner.

  • 3.0 Purpose of assessment

  • 3.1 Assessment satisfies a number of related requirements, namely that it:

is integrated with the process of student learning;

demonstrates that a student has achieved the learning outcomes for their programme of study;

justifies the award of academic credit based on actual student achievement

provides confidence in the maintenance of academic standards both internally and to external stakeholders;

supports the evaluation and enhancement of programme design and delivery;

provides meaningful feedback to students on their performance on a programme of study which promotes learning; provides meaningful information to employers, PSRBs and other organisations on the knowledge and competencies of a graduate;

supports the enhancement of programme design and programme delivery.

  • 3.2 Additionally, assessment may be used as a diagnostic tool to determine the current knowledge and skills of a student and to assist in the formulation of a programme of future study.

  • 4.0 Principles of assessment

  • 4.1 Assessment regulations establish a framework for the conduct of assessment across all taught programmes. This framework of assessment regulations will specify the extent of local interpretation at School level and in support of specific programme requirements.

  • 4.2 Assessment regulations will establish sound procedures for the advanced communication of assessment requirements (including assessment criteria), the submission, conduct of examinations, marking and moderation of assessments, the progression of students, the remediation of failure and the conduct of meetings of Boards of Examiners. The regulations will ensure that academic standards are maintained and that there is a retention schedule for copies of assessments and feedback on assessments.

  • 4.3 Assessment regulations will be reviewed on a periodic basis to ensure that they remain fit for purpose.

  • 4.4 As part of the procedures for the validation and review of awards, programme teams are required to develop an assessment strategy which demonstrates a close alignment with the full range of intended learning outcomes (including knowledge and understanding, intellectual skills, practical skills and transferable skills) and mode(s) of study of that programme, including the requirements of professional and statutory bodies.

  • 4.5 Programme assessment strategies will be designed to assess all intended learning outcomes but should reduce the level of assessment to the minimum required to demonstrate the above and should avoid duplication.

  • 4.6 QMU is committed to principles of best practice in assessment, as established by the QAA Code of Practice section 6: Assessment of Students.

  • 4.7 QMU is committed to the principles of equality of opportunity and assessment regulations and procedures will be designed such that they actively promote equality of opportunity, irrespective of age, disability, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion and belief.

  • 4.8 QMU subscribes to the principle of anonymous marking, wherever this is practicable.

4.9

QMU supports the principles of the award of credit and of credit transfer, as specified by the SCQF, in all of its assessment procedures.

  • 4.10 QMU supports the recognition of, and the award of credit for, prior learning.

  • 4.11 QMU recognises the need for transparency in the assessment of students.

  • 4.12 QMU recognises the need for a detailed student transcript, in accordance with the Diploma Supplement, as a means of communicating the broad range of formal and informal learning achieved by a student.

  • 4.13 All modules which are designed to lead to the award of academic credit will be expressed in terms of learning outcomes that are capable of assessment and will include details of the assessment and of the assessment criteria to be employed.

  • 4.14 All modules which lead to the award of academic credit will come under the purview of a Board of Examiners and will be assigned to an External Examiner.

  • 4.15 The normal language of assessment is English, but other languages may be used where this is described as part of the definitive document for a programme and, in these cases, the language of instruction and assessment will be clearly shown on the students’ transcript.

  • 4.16 Programme specifications will specify the format of assessment but, as a minimum requirement, QMU requires a student to submit a digital copy of all assessments, wherever this is practicable and this digital copy will act as the archive copy of that assessment;

  • 4.17 QMU requires staff as a minimum to submit feedback and grading for each assessment component on a pro forma.

This applies to coursework and examinations. Feedback on

course work will normally be individual. Feedback for examinations may be generic, however all students also have the right to request individual feedback. A digital copy of this pro forma will act as the archive copy of the feedback and grade awarded for that assessment. Pro formae may be completed electronically or scanned instead if handwritten.

  • 4.18 A digital copy of student assessments and the related feedback pro formae will be kept during the time that a student is matriculated, and as specified by the University’s Records Retention Schedule.

    • 5.0 Fairness, reliability and validity of assessment

    • 5.1 Assessment can take many different forms, as dictated by the variety of programmes and learning outcomes but, in all cases it should be:

Fair, in that there should be equality of treatment across all programmes and that there should be a consistent approach to equality and diversity;

Valid, that is the assessment can be shown to be relevant to the intended learning outcomes;

Reliable, in that there should be consistency of processes and standards across the

institution and that there should be comparability of both the volume and complexity of assessment in relation to credit and level; Useful, in that it contributes to the knowledge and competencies and employability of the

learner; Transparent, in that the requirements of the assessment in terms of intended learning outcomes and assessment criteria are made clear to the student.

  • 5.2 To maximise accuracy and fairness of assessment programme teams are expected to follow the procedures for marking, moderation and blind double marking set out below. The terms ‘marking’, ‘moderation’ and ‘blind double marking’ are defined as follows: Marking

‘The process of assessing students’ work, taking into account QMU guidelines for assessment feedback, the relevant criteria/mark schemes as devised by programme and/or module teams’.

Moderation

The process of confirming the consistency of the mark and feedback provided by the original

marker(s)’

Blind double marking

Marking conducted without access to marks, annotations or comments from any other marker. Both markers must use the relevant criteria and provide feedback to students in the agreed format.

  • 5.3 All assessed work should have associated marking criteria. These guides to marking should be developed simultaneously with assessment instruments and, where practicable, be approved by the External Examiner. Sharing of approved marking criteria with students is a required feature of good practice. All feedback given to students should relate to the agreed marking criteria.

  • 5.4 All summative assessments for undergraduate and postgraduate programmes that are not blind-double marked must be moderated on a sampling basis as a means of verifying the accuracy of marking. The size of the sample to be moderated must be at least the square root of the total number of students (rounded to the nearest whole number) taking the assessment plus all borderline fails. The sample should include a range of performance and the minimum size should be six pieces of assessed work. All assessments contributing the equivalent of more than 25 per cent to the final award at SCQF levels 9, 10, 11 and 12 must be blind double-marked for the whole cohort. This includes Honours projects and postgraduate dissertations.

  • 5.5 Where there are differences between first and second markers, these should be resolved through a process of discussion and negotiation. On occasions where such differences cannot be resolved through this method, the case will be referred to a third marker.

  • 5.6 In circumstances where an External Examiner has concerns about the submitted marks for a sample of assessments, the External Examiner may not modify one or more marks of the sample group of students but must moderate the marks of the whole cohort. External Examiners may make recommendations only on the adjustment of marks. It is the responsibility of the Programme Team to consider these recommendations and take a final decision on the student mark.

  • 5.7 The University operates a standardised system for anonymous marking to ensure fairness in the assessment process. Matriculation numbers are shown on the front cover of coursework or examination booklets, to assist in tracking and monitoring of anonymised work.

  • 5.8 Proposals for exemption for modules that cannot be anonymously marked will be considered through the University’s validation and review process or committee structure as appropriate.

  • 5.9 School Boards will review the implementation of anonymous marking across programmes and report to the Student Experience Committee on its operation as necessary.

    • 5.10 In all cases module co-ordinators have responsibility for the conduct and quality control of assessment in their own module(s). Programme Leaders are deemed responsible for the quality of assessment across programmes and are accountable to the Head of Division / Associate Dean through the Programme Committee. Deans of School have responsibility for assessment policy and staff development (as it affects assessment) within the parameters set by the University and any relevant professional and statutory bodies. It is expected however that this responsibility will be delegated to Heads of Division.

5.11

School Offices are responsible for the maintenance and retention of records of all raw first and second marks. The Student Records Office under the direction of the Assistant Registrar (Student Records) will maintain a central archive of approved final marks.

  • 6.0 Forms of assessment

  • 6.1 The form and balance of assessment for each module should be such as to provide the most accurate assessment of the student's achievement of the module's aims, objectives and learning outcomes. Assessment may be by end-of-module assessment; or by intermittent or periodic assessment undertaken during the course of the module.

  • 6.2 The module descriptor and the Programme Specification shall specify the relative assessment pattern, including weightings across components. The assessment pattern must be based on the intended learning outcomes of that module.

  • 6.3 Normally assessment will relate to some or all of the learning outcomes of a single module. Where an assessment covers learning outcomes from two or more modules, this must be clearly described in the Programme specification and module descriptors.

  • 6.4 By the commencement of each module the module co-ordinator must advise the enrolled students of the form of the assessment and the timing of the components which make up the assessment. This will be consistent with the overall framework established for the programme’s assessment, as specified in the module descriptors.

  • 6.5 At the start of each programme, Programme Leaders will inform students of the assessment regulations for the programme governing progression and award, and of any changes thereto.

  • 6.6 Written work shall be marked and returned in accordance with University procedures and practices.

  • 6.7 Attendance conditions can be imposed but must be made clear to students and a register of attendance taken.

PART B 16.AWARD REGULATIONS

  • 7.0 Marks, grades and levels of performance

  • 7.1 Assessment is primarily a matter of academic judgement, and the computational structure is designed to facilitate consistent judgements.

  • 7.2 A student’s overall performance on an undergraduate module will be given marks within one of seven grades as follows:

Grade

Mark

Corresponding level in an Honours degree

classification

A

70% and

first class

above

B

60 – 69.9%

upper second

C

50 – 59.9%

lower second

D

40 – 49.9%

third class

E

30 – 39.9%

fail

F

20 – 29.9%

fail

G

19.9% or

fail

below

  • 7.3 A student’s overall performance on a postgraduate module will be given marks within one of eight grades as follows:

Grade

Mark

Award classification

A

80% and above

Distinction

B

70 – 79%

Distinction

C

60 – 69%

Pass

D

50 – 59%

Pass

E

40 – 49%

Fail

F

30 – 39%

Fail

G

20 – 29%

Fail

H

19% or below

Fail

  • 7.4 These grades should be used in a consistent fashion at all levels of assessment whether it is judging a student’s overall performance; a cohort’s performance, a module grade, or a piece of assessed coursework.

  • 7.5 The criteria for each of the grades above are listed in the Appendices.

  • 7.6 Normally subjects will be assessed using marks and grades. However, in exceptional circumstances subjects may be assessed using grades only. This will be recorded in programme regulations.

  • 7.7 If an undergraduate subject is assessed using a grade only, then the following grade-to- mark conversion scheme shall be used for the purposes of computation:

Grade

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Mark

77

65

55

45

35

25

10

  • 7.8 If a postgraduate subject is assessed using a grade only, then the following grade-to-mark conversion scheme shall be used for the purpose of computation.

Grade

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Mark

85

75

65

55

45

35

25

10

In most cases, the mark is set at the midpoint of the band. However, it is proposed that the mark at Grade A should be limited to 85 to reflect the comparatively few marks likely to be awarded over 90%.

  • 7.9 If appropriate, examiners may adjust the raw marks attained by students in individual subjects, but the basis of the scaling must be reported to the Board of Examiners who will be asked to endorse the scaling.

  • 8.0 Award

  • 8.1 To gain an undergraduate award, a student must normally be a registered student at the University for at least one academic year. Minimum registration periods for postgraduate awards are set out in the Taught Postgraduate Framework. To qualify for the following awards the student must fulfil the subject specific requirements for the name of the award and also:

Cert HE

120 credit points at SCQF Level 7

Dip HE

240 credit points, at least 120 at SCQF Level 8

Degree

360 credit points, at least 120 at SCQF Level 9 and 120 at

Honours Degree

SCQF level 8 480 credit points, at least 120 at SCQF Level 10 and 120 at

Graduate Diploma Postgraduate Certificate Postgraduate Diploma Masters Degree

SCQF Level 9 120 credit points, at minimum of SCQF Level 9 60 credit points, at SCQF Level 11 120 credit points, at SCQF Level 11 180 credit points at SCQF Level 11

  • 10 SCQF Credits are equivalent to 5 European Credits (ECTS) therefore 120 SCQF credits

equals 60 ECTS

  • 8.2 The classification of the award of the Degree with Honours will be based on the marks obtained in Level Three (20%) and Level Four (80%). Weighted aggregate scores will be rounded to one decimal place. The classification will be based upon the average mark obtained by combining the weighted results of all modules studied in Levels Three and Four.

    • 70 and above

>=60% and <70% >=50% and <60% >=40% and <50%

First Class Second Class: Upper division Second Class: Lower division Third Class

  • 8.3 The award of an Ordinary Degree can include an award with distinction, in cases where the average mark for the twelve 10 credit modules (or equivalent) at Level Three is 65% or higher.

  • 8.4 The award of taught Masters degrees and Postgraduate Diplomas can include an award with distinction. A distinction is granted if the average mark (each module being weighted in relation to its size – the dissertation will be weighted x 4) is 70% or over. The award of Postgraduate Certificate is without distinction.

  • 8.5 When granted an award a student will automatically be de-registered and must reapply if they wish to proceed to a higher or different award.

  • 8.6 Where a student is admitted to the University at Level Four the classification will be based entirely on Level Four grades.

  • 8.7 Where a student is admitted to a Level and given additional credit at that level gained externally, the grades from that credit may contribute to the classification where the credit is at the appropriate Level and where marks are available. Otherwise the classification will be based on grades gained entirely within the University.

9.0

Decision on award classifications in borderline cases (undergraduate degrees)

  • 9.1 All weighted average marks falling 0.5 per cent or less below the classification boundary are automatically reclassified at the higher level.

  • 9.2 All weighted average marks falling between 0.5 per cent and two percent below the classification boundary are deemed borderline cases. In these cases the final classification is determined by the preponderance of marks across level 4 credits. Borderline cases where any 60 or more credits (core or elective modules) are achieved in the classification above the boundary will be awarded the higher classification of degree. Additional viva voce examinations involving External Examiner should not be used in the consideration of borderline cases.

    • 10.0 Decision on an award in absence of complete assessment information

    • 10.1 Boards of Examiners have discretion to make an award in the absence of complete assessment information where it is established to the satisfaction of the Board of Examiners that:

such absence is due to a valid documented cause, which would include, but not be

limited to, a student’s illness; there is enough evidence of the student's achievement at the level at which they are being examined, which would normally equate to 2/3rds of the assessable work at that level, or evidence is subsequently obtained.

Where Boards of Examiners use their discretion to make an award in the absence of complete assessment information, the justification for this action should be included in the minutes of the meeting.

  • 10.2 Awards may be recommended with or without Honours or distinction as appropriate. In order to reach such a decision the Board of Examiners may assess the candidate by any appropriate and reasonable means. Any such assessment will for the purpose of these regulations be deemed a first assessment.

  • 10.3 The Board of Examiners has a duty to gain as much information about the candidate’s ability and performance as possible before making decisions.

  • 10.4 Decisions made in absence of complete information must aim to ensure consistency of standard and equality of opportunity for the student under consideration as compared with his/her peers. The student must not be put in a position of unfair advantage over other candidates for the award.

  • 11.0 Withdrawing from a module

  • 11.1 A student withdrawing from a module after 25% of the duration has elapsed may provide the module co-ordinator with a written explanation of reasons for withdrawal. If the module co- ordinator accepts these as valid extenuating circumstances, the student will suffer no academic penalty, i.e. the withdrawal will not count as a fail. The student will receive a transcript showing them as withdrawn and will receive no credit.

  • 11.2 A student withdrawing from a module after 25% of the duration without providing evidence of extenuating circumstances will be recorded as a fail.

  • 12.0 Transcripts

  • 12.1 The student’s printed assessment record or academic transcript shall specify for each module taken:

the title

the credit points and the level (if defined)

the academic year in which most recently taken

the grade and mark most recently obtained

the name of the University together with, if appropriate, the name of any other institution

sharing responsibility for the student’s programme of study or research the location of study

Language of instruction/assessment

Decision on progress/award

  • 12.2 The University’s transcript meets the requirements of the European Diploma Supplement.

  • 12.3 Guidance on European Credit Points is provided for all students receiving transcripts in the accompanying Guidance Notes.

PART C 17.ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS

  • 13.0 Terminology For the purposes of these regulations the following definitions shall apply:

  • 13.1 Component A component is defined as an individual piece of assessment, for example an examination or an essay. Some modules will have one assessment component only. Others may have multiple components.

  • 13.2 Reassessment Reassessment means the opportunity to re-sit an assessment component which has been failed once only. Normally reassessment happens within the same academic year or shortly thereafter. The timing of the reassessment is at the discretion of the Board of Examiners but must allow the student sufficient time to prepare.

  • 13.3 Repeat A student who has been reassessed and has failed an assessment for the second time may be offered the opportunity to repeat the module in its entirety with full reassessment facilities. This is at the discretion of the Board of Examiners. The timing of the repeat module and attendance requirements are at the discretion of the Board of Examiners

  • 14.0 Programme regulations

  • 14.1 Programme regulations for progression and award are written in the context of the University’s general assessment regulations; they should be interpreted in that context and where they are silent the University’s general assessment regulations are taken to apply. Programme specific regulations shall cover the following points:

the requirements for passing a module

the requirements for progression

the conditions and limits to the provision for re-assessment of modules

the conditions and limits to the provision for repeating a module or a level

the conditions under which a student shall be required to withdraw from the programme

It is expected that Programme regulations will be consistent with the University’s general assessment regulations. Any exceptions must be approved through the validation or committee approval process.

  • 15.0 Assessment of a module

  • 15.1 To pass an undergraduate module, a student must obtain at least 40% overall, and at least 30% in each component of assessment as specified in the module descriptor. To pass a postgraduate module, a student must obtain at least 50% overall, and at least 40% in each component of assessment as specified in the module descriptor. This regulation applies to the first attempt at the module only. Regulations for reassessment and repeat of modules are detailed below.

  • 15.2 Where a student is reassessed in an undergraduate module at a second attempt or repeats an undergraduate module in its entirety, the maximum mark that can be achieved for the module is 40%. Where a student is reassessed in a postgraduate module at a second attempt or repeats a postgraduate module in its entirety, the maximum mark that can be achieved for the module is 50%. The nature and extent of the failure will not affect the student’s right to be reassessed.

  • 15.3 Module specific regulations which deviate from 15.1 and 15.2 must be approved through the University’s validation committee approval process and clearly recorded in the module descriptor.

15.4

Applications may be made to the Programme Leader, who will consult with the Module Co-ordinator, with appropriate supporting documentary evidence, for:

extension to an assessment deadline;

deferment of an examination;

special arrangements for undertaking an examination.

  • 16.0 Decisions on student progression

  • 16.1 Student progression from one level of the programme to the next is at the discretion of the Board of Examiners taking into account students’ performance in all modules and the amount of academic credit accrued during the year.

  • 16.2 The main Board of Examiners is responsible for determining:

Whether the student remains in registration

The conditions governing the student’s progression

The award for which the student is eligible

  • 16.3 Where there is a tiered system of Boards of Examiners, the subsidiary Board will have the authority to moderate and confirm marks and grades for each of the modules for which it is responsible, and determine the form and timing of any re-assessment offered.

  • 16.4 Decisions on a student’s continued registration will be made at the end of each academic year, after re-assessment results are known. The main Board of Examiners will take account of the following guidelines in making their decisions.

  • 16.5 For undergraduate full-time students:

a)

Pass modules rated to a total of 80 or more credits – continue in registration as a full-time

student Full-time students can take a maximum of 160 credits in any academic year. This regulation is intended to support students carrying forward modules and not to facilitate completion of

studies in a shorter time than the usual minimum period of registration.

b)

Pass modules rated to a total of 60 or 70 credits – continue in registration as a part-time

student but may not register for modules rated at more than 70 credits in the next year of study

c)

Pass modules rated at 50 credits or less – required to discontinue registration

  • 16.6 For undergraduate part-time students Pass 50% or more of the modules taken – continue in registration

  • 16.7 A part-time student allowed to continue in registration, wishing to transfer to full-time study will have her or his application considered by the programme’s admission tutor. Transfer is not at the student’s discretion.

  • 16.8 The only decisions available to the Board of Examiners on progress and award shall be:

a)

Continue – passed all assessments

b)

Required to be reassessed in the failed module(s) before continuing

c)

Continue – but required to be reassessed in the failed/deferred module(s) in next

academic year

d)

Continue – but required to repeat the failed module(s) in next academic year

e)

Offered opportunity to repeat the entire level in next academic year before continuing

f)

Offered opportunity to repeat failed module(s) in next academic year as a part-time student

before

continuing

g)

Continue in part time registration (applies to part-time students only)

h)

No re-assessment allowed – required to withdraw from course

i)

Decision deferred – outstanding assessments as a first diet

j)

Decision deferred – outstanding re-assessments

k)

Recommendation to Senate for specific awards

  • 16.9 Undergraduate programmes of study are designed on four levels corresponding with Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework levels 7, 8, 9 and 10, with conceptual and material progression being designed into the structure from level to level. Thus it is expected that students will progress from level to level, and the structure of the programme and the timetables are developed accordingly. Although the above regulations may allow a full time student to stay in full time registration albeit without a completed level of study, it may not be possible to construct a programme around the timetable available which is academically coherent and which makes best advantage of the student’s time. In most cases students will be expected and advised but not required to complete a level of study before progressing to the next level.

    • 16.10 Full-time students may not normally proceed to Level 4 study unless they are eligible for the award of an Ordinary Degree or exceptionally fall short by only 20 credit points.

    • 16.11 A student may cease to be registered for a postgraduate award if he or she:

      • a) fails to register on any module in two successive semesters without prior

approval (unless enrolled on a dissertation);

  • b) is granted the award of PgCert, PgDip, MSc, MA, MBA, Executive Masters or MFA;

  • c) fails to have the dissertation proposal approved after two submissions

  • d) accumulates fails as specified in regulations 16.12 and 16.13

  • 16.12 A student will normally be required to withdraw from a postgraduate award if he or she accumulates four or more failures, whether or not these have been later redeemed through reassessment, on any standard taught modules (15 credits). A failure is defined as an unsuccessful attempt at the assessment for a module. For example, this could be failures in four separate modules at the first attempt, or failure at first and second attempt in one module and failures at first attempt in two other modules.

  • 16.13 Individual postgraduate programmes with a non-standard structure may define programme specific regulations under which a student may be required to withdraw. These regulations should be broadly in line with the above principle. In other words, students will normally be allowed to accumulate at least three failures, but will not be allowed to fail 50% of the taught modules at the first attempt. Programme specific regulations defined to meet the requirements of professional bodies should be approved by the validation panel.

    • 17.0 Reassessment

    • 17.1 Reassessment is permitted in order to allow a student to make good an initial failure. This affords the student an opportunity to demonstrate the standard required to pass modules, and ultimately to gain an award.

    • 17.2 The Board of Examiners may at its discretion allow an undergraduate student to be re- assessed in up to eight taught modules (equivalent to 80 credits) in any one academic year. The Board of Examiners may at its discretion allow a postgraduate student to be re- assessed in up to four taught modules during the course of their studies.

    • 17.3 The Board of Examiners shall decide on the form of the reassessment (e.g. written examination, viva voce, or an additional assignment), taking into account the nature of the failed module and the nature of the failure. This may differ from the format of the first assessment and need not be the same for all students provided equity of experience is maintained. The Board of Examiners can allow for full or partial reassessment of the components as appropriate.

    • 17.4 Normally, a student may not be reassessed in a module more than once, other than when the module is repeated.

    • 17.5 A candidate for reassessment is not entitled to be reassessed in components that are no longer part of the programme. A Board of Examiners may, at its discretion, make such

special arrangements as it deems suitable in cases where it is inappropriate for students to be reassessed in the same elements, or by the same methods as at the first attempt.

  • 17.6 All reassessments shall take place before the commencement of the next session of the programme. They should be late enough to allow the students time to prepare themselves, and to avoid overload of assessment shall normally take place in the autumn diets.

  • 17.7 A student who is reassessed for a module failure in an undergraduate module, where there are no clear extenuating circumstances, shall be awarded no more than 40% on passing the re-assessment. A student who is reassessed for a module failure in a postgraduate module, where there are no clear extenuating circumstances, shall be awarded no more than 50% on passing the reassessment.

  • 17.8 All reassessment results shall be based only upon performance in re-assessments; no marks may be carried forward from a student’s first attempt at the assessments. To pass an undergraduate module at reassessment, students must achieve at least 30% in each reassessed component and a weighted average of at least 40%. To pass a postgraduate module at reassessment, students must achieve at least 40% in each reassessed component and a weighted average of at least 50%.

  • 17.9 A student who has been absent from an assessment or who has performed badly due to illness or other good cause acceptable to the Board of Examiners shall be allowed to take the assessment and it shall be treated as a first assessment.

  • 18.0 Repeating a module

  • 18.1 Boards of Examiners will take into account a student’s overall academic progress in deciding whether or not to permit repetition of a module.

  • 18.2 In the event of a failure after reassessment in a module, the Board of Examiners may permit a student to repeat the module, with full re-assessment facilities. No parts of the previous assessment may be carried forward. The regulations for attendance shall apply to the repeated module unless otherwise specified by the Board of Examiners. A student may repeat a failed module only once.

  • 18.3 Where a module is repeated the mark and grade obtained will replace the mark and grade achieved at earlier attempts. When repeating a module regulation 15.1 will apply to assessment of individual components. However, the maximum overall mark that can be achieved when repeating an undergraduate module is 40%. The maximum overall mark that can be achieved when repeating a postgraduate module is 50%

  • 19.0 Assessment of disabled students and of students whose first language is not English

  • 19.1 Disabled students

19.1.1 If, through disability, a student is unable to be assessed by the prescribed method for the module, the Programme Leader may determine alternative assessment methods on the advice of the module co-ordinator. This will be recorded in the student’s Individual Learning Plan. In determining alternative assessment methods Programme Leaders will take into account the need to assess the student on equal terms with other students. The Board of Examiners will ratify any such decisions. Variations may include the following:

an extension of the normal registration period for completing an award;

extra time being allowed for assessments;

alternative or modified assessments;

use of scribes in assessments;

use of viva voce assessment;

use of appropriate aids (such as word processor, Brailler, tape-recorder, large print scripts).

19.1.2

Extra time will be allocated in examinations for disabled students and students whose circumstances may affect their performance. In both cases students must submit certification to attest their eligibility. Unless otherwise specified in the certification, such students will be allocated 25% extra time.

  • 19.1.3 Students should normally submit requests for extra-time to Programme Leaders at least six weeks before each block of examinations. Approval of requests rests with the Programme Leader with advice from the relevant Disabled Student Co-ordinator and in consultation with the Module Co-ordinator. However, students with existing Individual Learning Plans outlining relevant adjustments (e.g. extra time or particular aids) for exams will not be required to make a separate request to Programme Leaders and will not be required to make separate arrangements before each block. Details of all students to be allocated extra- time must be submitted by Divisions to the Records Administration Section of Registry in conjunction with exam papers. Programme Leaders should indicate particular aids required, such as provision of separate rooms, scribes or computer facilities.

  • 19.1.4 Arrangements for the assessment of disabled students will be made prior to, or at the point of assessment. Further allowance or compensation for disability will not be made in the marking of assessed work.

    • 19.2 Students whose first language is not English

      • 19.2.1 All students whose first language is not English will normally be permitted to use language- only dictionaries in examinations. Electronic dictionaries are not permitted (please refer to Exam Regulations section).

      • 19.2.2 Except where a programme is specifically exempt, all students in undergraduate Levels 1 and 2 whose first language is not English will be eligible for 25% extra-time in examinations. Details of all such students to be allocated extra-time must be submitted by Divisions to the Records Administration Section of Registry in conjunction with exam papers.

      • 19.2.3 Programmes may apply for exemption from allocating extra-time in examinations to students in undergraduate Levels 1 and 2 whose first language is not English. Proposals should be submitted to the School Board for approval All relevant programme documentation, particularly student handbooks, must make this exemption explicit. The following programmes are exempt: BSc (Hons) and Graduate Diploma Speech and Language Therapy; BSc (Hons) Physiotherapy.

        • 20.0 Penalties for word limits and late submission of assessment

        • 20.1 A piece of written work which exceeds the specified word limit by 10% or more will receive a maximum mark of 40% for undergraduate or 50% for postgraduate programmes.

        • 20.2 In each piece of written work where a word limit is identified, students are required to include and clearly state the total number of words used. The number of words counted should include all the text, references and quotations used in the text, but should exclude abstracts, supplements to the text, diagrams, appendices, reference lists and bibliographies.

        • 20.3 Any student who submits work to be assessed after the assessment submission date, without the prior agreement of the Programme Leader and the Module Co-ordinator, or without good or agreed cause, will have marks deducted according to the following criteria:

if submitted, in a first diet, after the due date but within one calendar week (i.e. up to 6

days after submission date) a maximum mark of 40% can be achieved for undergraduate programmes and a maximum mark of 50% for postgraduate programmes if submitted, in a first diet, after one calendar week (i.e. 7 days or more) a mark of 0%

will be awarded if coursework is submitted after the due date for a re-assessment a mark of 0% will be awarded.

PART D 18.RESPONSIBILITIES AND EXPECTATIONS

  • 21.0 Student responsibility in assessment

  • 21.1 It is the responsibility of students to:

familiarise themselves with the regulations for their course. Students should consult

their Programme/Scheme Handbook and/or their academic tutor; attend examinations and observe the University’s Instruction to Candidates in

Examinations (to be read out to students prior to the start of examinations). In brief, these require candidates to attend in good time, to bring their matriculation card, not to communicate with other candidates, not to cheat, not to disrupt the event, to complete the answer paper as instructed, not to bring into the hall any unauthorised material and not to remove any part of an answer paper from the hall; familiarise themselves with the examination periods (both first attempt and re-

assessment and make themselves available for the examination period); recognise the role of assessment in the achievement and recognition of their

learning; submit work for assessment as required, in accordance with the regulations for their

course; provide evidence, in advance of the Board of Examiners, of any extenuating circumstances. This evidence is normally written by an independent source such as a medical practitioner and should be forwarded to the Programme Leader. Students should be aware that Boards of Examiners will take account of all certificated or verified evidence submitted on behalf of students in their deliberations on individual performance.

  • 21.2 If a student fails to attend examinations or submit work for assessment without good cause, the Board of Examiners has the authority to deem the student to have failed the assessments concerned.

  • 21.3 Fraudulent practices such as copying, cheating, collusion, plagiarism (i.e. the presentation by an individual of another person’s ideas or work (in any medium, published or unpublished) as though they were his or her own) are serious academic offences and will incur appropriate penalties. Students are urged to seek advice from the Programme Leader or other tutors if in any doubt about the foregoing practices. All students are expected to seek clear guidance on the form and manner in which assessments are to be completed.

  • 21.4 If a student is found to have cheated or attempted to gain an unfair advantage, the Board of Examiners has authority to deem the student to have failed part or all of the assessment and to determine whether or not the student shall be permitted to be re-assessed.

  • 21.5 Students must ensure the proper acknowledgement of the borrowings from other sources, whether published or unpublished. Divisions should provide guidance on how such borrowings should be acknowledged in a manner appropriate to that discipline.

  • 21.6 Serious cases of cheating and plagiarism will be referred for consideration through the University’s disciplinary procedure. Undertaking fraudulent practices can result in a student being required to leave the University.

  • 21.7 QMU has a policy to use the TurnItIn UK plagiarism detection system, or other equivalent systems, to help students avoid plagiarism and improve their scholarship skills. This service is available to all matriculated students at QMU. Tutors at QMU may submit student work to TurnItIn UK or another equivalent system.

Responsibility of other individuals and bodies in assessment

  • 22.1 Senate, through its Student Experience Committee, has the responsibility for:

the development of assessment policy;

monitoring the use of this policy by the Schools;

periodically reviewing and revising this policy.

  • 22.2 The Deans of School have the responsibility for ensuring that:

programmes within that School conform to this Policy;

assessment processes are approved and reviewed;

assessment processes are secure;

through the annual monitoring process, there is reflection on student performance in

assessment and in relation to programme learning outcomes; periodic review of assessment strategies are conducted;

staff are supported in the development of assessment strategies and practices;

students are involved in the evaluation of assessment strategies;

External Examiners are briefed on this Policy;

issues arising through the implementation of this Policy are conveyed to the Student Experience Committee.

  • 22.3 Programme Leaders have the responsibility for:

assuring that academic standards are maintained through the effective use of this

policy and its local implementation via the programme definitive document; monitoring the outcomes of assessment and reporting these outcomes to the School.

  • 22.4 Academic staff have the responsibility to:

design assessments that both conform to this policy and which assess the specified

learning outcomes and which make reasonable adjustments to meet the needs of all learners; provide feedback on student performance in relation to assessment outcomes;

clearly specify the date by which a student can expect to receive feedback on each summative assignment. This date must be communicated to the student at the same time as the assessment deadline and should normally be no later than four working weeks (20 working days) after submission. ‘Working days’ do not include University holiday periods. In exceptional circumstances, the original date communicated to students for receipt of feedback may be extended. Any such extension must be communicated to students at least one working week (seven calendar days) before the original deadline for receipt of feedback. Where a student has been granted an extension, the timescale for receiving feedback will be adjusted accordingly.

Different arrangements may apply for formative assessment, depending on the activity and discipline. These should be communicated to the student at the same time as the formative assessment is set.

  • 23.0 Project supervision

  • 23.1 General All project supervision meetings with undergraduate, postgraduate and research students must be documented, signed by both student and supervisor, and filed as a record of the supervisory process. Documentation should include the date and duration of the meeting and a summary of the discussion.

  • 23.2 Honours Project Supervision

23.2.1 The time allocated to supervision of Honours level projects and dissertations should normally be no less than three hours and not more than five hours per student. These minimum and maximum time allocations apply only to supervisory meetings with students and do not include time taken to read draft work.

23.2.2

Early in the academic year all supervisors should hold an initial meeting with their supervisees to discuss key elements of the process, including expectations, regulations, terms of reference and operational procedures. This meeting could be held as a joint meeting between a supervisor and all of his/her supervisees. A record of all meetings between a student and their supervisor should be lodged in the student file at the time of submission of the project or dissertation.

  • 23.2.3 Staff members should normally read and give feedback on one draft only and should not mark or re-write this work.

    • 23.3 Postgraduate project and research supervision Further information is available in the Taught Postgraduate Framework and Research Degrees Regulations.

    • 24.0 Academic dishonesty and plagiarism

    • 24.1 Introduction

      • 24.1.1 This institution’s degrees and other academic awards are given in recognition of the candidate’s achievement. Plagiarism is therefore, together with other forms of academic dishonesty such as personation, falsification of data, computer and calculation fraud, examination room cheating and bribery, considered an act of academic fraud and is an offence against University discipline.

      • 24.1.2 Plagiarism is defined as follows: The presentation by an individual of another person’s ideas or work (in any medium, published or unpublished) as though they were his or her own.

      • 24.1.3 In the following circumstances academic collusion represents a form of plagiarism:

Academic collusion is deemed to be unacceptable where it involves the unauthorised and unattributed collaboration of students or others work resulting in plagiarism, which is against University discipline.

  • 24.1.5 QMU has a policy to use the TurnItIn UK plagiarism detection system, or other equivalent systems, to help students avoid plagiarism and improve improve their scholarship skills. This service is available to all matriculated students at QMU. QMU tutors may submit student work to TurnItIn UK, or another equivalent system.

    • 24.2 Referencing Students’ attention is drawn to the guide to referencing available in the library.

    • 24.3 Prevention

      • 24.3.1 All members of staff should explain to their students at the start of each session that plagiarism and academic fraud are unacceptable forms of cheating, which will be penalised severely. Such warnings should be repeated during the session and are especially necessary where dissertations, projects or coursework are substantial elements of the curriculum. Every opportunity should be taken to reinforce this message by incorporating it in published material such as Programme or scheme guides and, in the case of postgraduate research students, by its inclusion in the ‘Research Degrees Code of Practice ‘.

      • 24.3.2 These warnings should be accompanied by specific advice from Divisions about what constitutes plagiarism and academic fraud. For example, such advice should indicate where a particular discipline makes the distinction between legitimate and illegitimate use of acknowledged or unacknowledged sources; what is regarded as acceptable collaboration between students undertaking joint project work; and what is expected of a dissertation or

thesis. Dissertations should clearly indicate whether it is an original contribution to knowledge or a critical survey of published material. Training students to make such distinctions is part of the academic process and should be formally and publicly acknowledged as such. This is particularly significant since some of the cases arising stem from genuine ignorance on the part of the students who have never received guidance on how to acknowledge sources properly.

  • 24.3.3 Scrutiny of academic work should be sufficient to ensure that signs of plagiarism or unacceptable levels of co-operation, whether intentional or not, are detected at an early stage and brought to students’ attention through tutorial guidance and in some cases perhaps by written warning.

  • 24.3.4 Dissertation supervisors and other academic staff responsible for assessment and guidance should be aware of cultural relativities that may affect some students’ approach to referencing. In providing guidance, staff will be expected to acknowledge cultural differences and to exercise appropriate sensitivity.

    • 24.4 Identifying and reporting

      • 24.4.1 All concerns by tutors related to plagiarism must initially be discussed with the Programme Leader or other designated person who is responsible for making the decision to progress the case further under the University’s guidelines.

      • 24.4.2 If it is judged that the case falls into the category of poor academic practice that requires only remedial action, then the Programme Leader shall inform the student and either carry out the actions required or ensure that they are carried out via the referring tutor such as referring a student to the Student Learning Centre.

      • 24.4.3 If it is judged that there is academic misbehaviour or academic misconduct, then the case will be referred to the Dean of School under the QMU Code of Discipline. The Programme Leader will be responsible for the submission of evidential material to the Dean of School and for informing the student or students involved and any referring staff member of the decision to move to the Disciplinary process.

        • 24.5 Investigation

          • 24.5.1 The Dean of School or other person designated by the Dean shall investigate all referred cases. In consultation with the Academic Registrar, the Dean will determine if the case may be dealt with summarily under Section 5 of the QMU Code of Discipline.

          • 24.5.2 The Dean will interview the student before any other steps are taken under the Code of Discipline. The Dean will advise the student in writing of the referral, invite the student to make representations and advise the student of the support mechanisms available.

          • 24.5.3 At the interview, a friend or representative may accompany the student. If the Dean considers it appropriate to do so, and if the student agrees, the matter may be dealt with summarily, without recourse to a disciplinary committee.

          • 24.5.4 A designated member of the School Office will attend the student interview.

          • 24.5.5 The School Office will maintain records of all cases referred to the Dean or to a Disciplinary Committee. The member of the School Office acting as the Secretary to the Examination Board, will report the outcome of the case to the Board. This will be appropriate only in those cases where the allegation has been upheld, and the penalty applied by the Dean of School or the Disciplinary Committee.

          • 24.5.6 The designated member of the School Office will also, when appropriate:

migrate case records to a new field in ISIS;

delete migrated records from ISIS after the expiry date defined by QMU

regulations; remove case records when a student leaves QMU.

24.5.7

The student will be responsible for:

Providing evidence on request;

Attending an investigatory meeting;

Either accepting a disciplinary recommendation or proceeding to an appeal under the provisions of the Code of Discipline.

  • 24.5.8 In the case of a distance learning student an investigatory meeting can be conducted by any appropriate means.

  • 24.5.9 At all times, students will be able to call upon the support and guidance of the Student’s Union. It is expected that the Student’s Union will have trained staff to support students and to attend interviews/meetings with the Dean and/or the Disciplinary Committee.

    • 24.5.10 If the matter is dealt with summarily, the Dean will consider written or oral evidence as he or she thinks fit. That may include any plagiarism detection software or other dishonesty detection mechanisms made available by QMU. It will also include any evidence or representations from the student or students involved as well as from the Programme Leader or from any other member of staff deemed necessary to make a determination. This can include “expert witnesses”. The QMU student record system may also be checked for previous recorded instances of proven plagiarism.

    • 24.5.11 If there is a possibility that the allegation, if proved, may lead to the suspension or exclusion of the student, then the case must be referred to a Disciplinary Committee.

    • 24.5.12 In the case of a distance learning student, a telephone or video conference interview will be organised and the student fully briefed about the timing and structure of the interview;

    • 24.5.13 If a finding of guilt is made, the Dean may impose any of the penalties set out in the Code of Discipline, other than expulsion from the University.

At the termination of the proceedings, the Dean will write a short report. In the event of a finding of guilt, the report will set out the misconduct alleged, a brief summary of evidence received, the grounds for the finding of guilt, the penalty imposed, and the factors taken

into account in deciding the penalty. A copy of the report will be sent to the student, to the

Programme Leader and to the referring Tutor.

If the report contains recommendations

concerning examination marks, a copy of the report will also be sent to the appropriate Board of Examiners.

  • 24.5.14 There is a right of appeal against a finding of guilt.

PART E

19.APPENDICES

Undergraduate Grade Marking Criteria

Grade A 80% and above Outstanding performance, exceptionally able

Demonstrates comprehensive understanding of the question or problem and presents evidence of extensive reading of appropriate texts reflected in illuminating references in work. Shows exceptional originality in problem solving, analysis and evaluation, and presents arguments in a fluent and convincing manner. Displays the ability to synthesise concepts, knowledge and theory and exceptional insight and critical thinking.

Grade A 70-79.9% Outstanding performance

Shows clear understanding and interpretation of the question set. Includes all of the most relevant information/issues raised by the question. Demonstrates knowledge of appropriate reading through references to texts and journal material. Shows thorough understanding of theoretical/conceptual issues. Demonstrates ability to present answers in a balanced and coherent way. Shows awareness of value judgements/assumptions embodied in the question. Demonstrates ability to analyse issues raised and evaluate evidence presented.

Grade B 60-69.9% Very good performance

In awarding a mark in this range the marker will be looking for essentially the same kind of evidence as used above, but will mark in this range where the evidence is not so strong in relation to each category, or where the work does not match up to the standards in two or three categories.

Grade C 50-59.9% Average performance

Generally understands the question and interprets the question appropriately. Brings in most of the

main points/issues raised by the question. Only isolated reference to reading. Generally understands concepts involved, theoretical understanding rather shallow. Presents points reasonably clearly; demonstrates some analytical ability. Shows awareness of value positions required by the question.

Grade D 40-49.9% Satisfactory Performance

Limited understanding of the question set. Discusses some of the main points/issues raised by the

question. Limited reference to reading. Some understanding of concepts - limited but accurate factual information. Muddled/unclear presentation. Unsupported value statements.

Grade E 30-39.9% Fail

Unsatisfactory standard. Some attempt to address issues in the question but which do not quite

meet the criteria outlined for an acceptable answer.

Grade F 20-29.9% Poor Fail

Clear failure. Limited attempt to address the issues in the question set but which do not meet the criteria outlined for an acceptable answer in a number of respects.

Grade G < 20% Bad fail

Marks in this range will be awarded for wrong or negligible answers and non-response.

Postgraduate grade marking criteria

The student will provide evidence of the following to achieve recognition of the grade banding:

Grade A

80%+ Excellent performance, exceptionally able

Mastery of the specialist area that demonstrates exceptional insight and breadth of knowledge.

Excellent comprehension of scholarly techniques and / or the research-base.

Presents extensive evidence of critical and deep knowledge of the specialist and related areas.

Ability to challenge and develop existing theory and/or professional practice

within the specialist area.

Demonstrates outstanding originality in the application of knowledge and the

development and inter-relationship between concepts, theories, policies and practice. Displays outstanding potential to undertake research or be a leading practitioner within a

specialist area. Demonstrates exceptional ability in synthesising knowledge from different disciplines.

Meets the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade B

70- 79.9% Very good performance [distinction mark is 70%]

Mastery with very good and critical comprehension of the specialist area with extensive

evidence of deep knowledge of relevant and related theories, principles and concepts of the major aspects of the area. Very good comprehension of scholarly techniques and / or the research-base.

Presents evidence of critical and deep knowledge of the specialist and related areas.

Some ability to challenge and develop existing theory and/or professional practice within the specialist area.

Demonstrates ability to identify, conceptualise and define or redefine concepts, theories, policies

and practice. Displays potential to undertake research or be a leading practitioner within a specialist area.

Demonstrates significant ability in synthesising knowledge from different disciplines.

Meets the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade C

60- 69.9% Good performance

Mastery with good comprehension of the specialist area with some evidence of deep knowledge

of relevant and related theories, principles and concepts, but lacking depth or critique in some areas. Good comprehension of scholarly techniques and / or the research-base.

Presents evidence of understanding of some advanced or complex issues at the forefront of the

subject or professional area. A good comprehension of how concepts and knowledge may be applied to inform judgements

and develop advanced ideas, policies or practices. Demonstrates ability in synthesising knowledge from different disciplines.

Meets the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade D 50- 59.9% Satisfactory performance Mastery with satisfactory comprehension of the specialist area with some insight into relevant and related theories, principles and concepts, but lacking depth or critique in some areas.

Limited comprehension of scholarly techniques and / or the research-base.

Some evidence of knowledge relating to advanced, current and complex issues within the

subject or professional area, but only in parts of the work. Some ability to identify and comprehend how concepts and knowledge may be applied to inform

judgements and develop ideas, policies or practices. Demonstrates some ability in synthesising knowledge from different disciplines.

Meets the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade E 40-49.9% Unsatisfactory performance - Fail

Unsatisfactory comprehension of the specialist area and little evidence of deep understanding of

theories, principles and concepts. Insufficient evidence of knowledge relating to advanced, current and complex issues at the

forefront of the subject or professional area. Insufficient evidence of comprehensive and critical knowledge related to the theoretical

concepts, scholarly techniques or the research-base supporting a specific area with some accurate factual information. Unsatisfactory evidence of how knowledge may be applied to inform judgements and develop advanced ideas, policies or practices with little originality of thought.

Demonstrates little ability in synthesising knowledge from different disciplines.

Meets only some of the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade F

30-39.9% Poor Fail

Unsatisfactory; does not meet learning outcomes of the module.

Limited attempt to demonstrate knowledge of the specialist area with inadequate evidence available.

Minimal evidence of knowledge and insight into theories, principles and concepts.

Inadequate evidence

of

critical

and

deep

knowledge

related

to

a

specialist

area.

Restricted evidence of advanced current and complex issues at the forefront of the subject or professional area. Insufficient evidence of comprehensive and critical knowledge related to the theoretical

concepts, scholarly techniques or the research-base supporting a specific area. Demonstrates no ability to synthesise knowledge from different disciplines.

Incomplete evidence of how knowledge may be applied to inform judgements and develop advanced ideas, policies or practices with little originality of thought.

Does not meet the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

 

Grade G

20-29.9% Bad fail

 

Clear failure, does not meet learning outcomes of the module.

Minimal knowledge of the specialist area and lack of evidence of deep understanding of

theories, principles and concepts. Inadequate and incomplete evidence of critical and deep knowledge related to a specialist area

and of advanced, current and complex issues at the forefront of the subject or professional area. Deficient in evidence of comprehensive and critical knowledge related to the theoretical

concepts, scholarly techniques or the research-base supporting a specific area. No ability to synthesise knowledge from different disciplines.

No understanding of how knowledge may be applied, to inform judgements and develop

advanced ideas, policies or practices with little originality of thought. Does not meet the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

Grade H

<20% Very bad fail and non-submission

 

Demonstrates a serious and unacceptable lack of knowledge and understanding of the

specialist area. No evidence of deep understanding of theories, principles and concepts.

Deficient in critical and deep knowledge related to a specialist area.

No evidence of comprehensive and critical knowledge related to the theoretical

concepts, scholarly techniques or the research-base supporting a specific area. Inadequate understanding of how knowledge may be applied, with originality, to

inform judgements and develop advanced ideas, policies or practices. No understanding of advanced, current and complex issues at the forefront of the

subject and professional area. No ability to synthesise knowledge from different disciplines

Does not meet the learning outcomes of the module or assessment.

APPENDIX IV- Aims and Learning Outcomes of Placement Blocks

PLACEMENT BLOCK A:

GENERAL AIMS

Be introduced to the work of the dietitian

Have the opportunity to practise communication skills with patients and healthcare workers

and demonstrate basic communication skills Be aware of the interaction between the dietitian and other healthcare professionals

Gain experience in an institutional food production unit

Be aware of the complementary roles of the catering and dietetic services

Demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge of portion sizes, basic cooking methods, standard recipes and recipe modification, and the range of food products available to the general public including nutrient modified foods

LEARNING OUTCOMES

The learning outcomes are in bold. Each one is followed by range statements (in italics) where appropriate and performance criteria (evidence).

Knowledge 1 To have working knowledge of portion sizes of common foods. Evidence

Weigh and record portions of a range of foods and meals.

Knowledge 2

To be familiar with the range of food and food products available to the general public including major nutrient-modified foods and ready-prepared meals. Evidence

Visit a supermarket and describe the range and relative costs of ready prepared meals and fat/sugar modified foods available to the general public. Compare the nutritional content of standard products with those above.

Knowledge 3 To be aware of how the use of nutrient modified foods can influence the diet both quantitatively and qualitatively. Evidence

Using a standard diet record, substitute fat and sugar modified food products and describe how it

affects the diet quantitatively and qualitatively using current recommendations on eating for health. Cost

both diets.* Students may wish to adapt their own diet and describe the effect on its palatability, satiety and appearance.

Knowledge 4 To have a working knowledge and practical experience of producing standard and modified recipes. Evidence

State the ingredient content of five standard recipes and how their fat and sugar content can be

modified (both decreased and increased). Prepare both the standard and modified dishes. Describe the effect of the modification on texture, appearance and taste.

Knowledge 5 To be able to demonstrate the ability to record, calculate and analyse individuals’ nutritional intake both by hand and by computer assisted analysis. Evidence

Using a food intake record chart, record what a patient/resident eats and drinks over a 24 hour period. Collate the information and analyse both by hand, using a table of food

composition, and by computer assisted analysis.

Identify the main sources of 3 vitamins or minerals likely to be deficient in an institutional diet.

Knowledge 6 To appreciate the factors to be considered in all aspects of menu planning. Evidence

List six factors to be considered when menu planning. Select an example of a day’s menu stating standard portion sizes. Find out the budget allocation for meals and beverages to feed a patient for one week. Compare

this with an estimate of your expenditure (excluding alcohol).

Knowledge 7 To appreciate the process of meal selection, service and delivery of meals. Evidence

Describe the process of patient/resident meal selection, service and delivery.

Knowledge 8 To be aware of the major health and safety issues within working environment. Evidence

List six major health and safety issues relevant to the working practices of the dietitian. Explain why they need to be addressed.

Communication 9 To have an understanding of the methods by which dietitians communicate with other health professionals, patients and the general public. Evidence

List three methods of communication with other healthcare professionals and the general public. Describe one successful communication between you and another individual. Consider why you think it was successful. Observe an interaction between a dietitian and a colleague. Describe the key points of the interaction.

Communication 10 To have experience of communicating with patients and healthcare professionals. Evidence

Detail any difficulties you have experienced when communicating with patients and colleagues. Outline how you could overcome these in the future.

Communication 11 To demonstrate an ability to converse with patients and health care professionals. Evidence

Initiate conversations. Collect information from patients/residents e.g. how many patients on a ward say they eat a cooked breakfast/cereal at home. Through discussion, collect information from healthcare professionals e.g. what is their role and how they work with dietitians.

Practice 12 To be aware of the need to respect the point of view of patients and why it is important to avoid discrimination. Evidence

List six ways in which individuals can be discriminated against.

Practice 13 Demonstrate the ability to maintain confidentiality. Evidence

State the potential consequences of breaking confidentiality.

Practice 14

To be able to explain the reason and need for the HPC Standards of Proficiency. Evidence

State the first two points from the Standards of Proficiency and describe an example of how you have applied these in practice.

Practice 15

Demonstrate professional appearance and behaviour.

Explain the need for a department dress code. List four personal qualities required by the professional dietitian.

Practice 16 To be able to identify those health professionals who work closely with a dietitian. Evidence

List four health professionals who provide information to facilitate dietetic treatment. Provide a relevant example of an interaction you have seen which facilitated treatment.

Practice 17 To be able to identify the key sources of patient information available to plan dietetic care. Evidence

List six sources of patient-specific information available to plan dietetic care. Provide one example you saw of how and why this information was used. Collect both social and medical information about one patient from medical notes.

Practice 18

To demonstrate an interest in and commitment to the work of dietitians. Ask appropriate questions when with dietitians and other health professionals. Be punctual and manage workload within timescale allocated.

PLACEMENT B AIMS AND LEARNING OUTCOMES

GENERAL AIMS

To enable the student to translate theory into practice for patients seen in Placement B

To develop confidence in obtaining information and advising clients

To develop interpersonal and social skills to facilitate communication with clients

To develop the skills of self and time management with respect to their own learning

and management of given workload