S 22JUNE2016 A7 Cover Sheet for Senate and its Sub-Committees

COMMITTEE: Senate

Commercial in Confidence: NO Delete as appropriate Date of meeting: 22nd June 2016 Author: Professor Mark Ormerod, Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Provost Title of paper: Reshaping and Simplification of Keele’s Academic Portfolio and Curriculum: Portfolio and

Curriculum Development (PCD) Project Update Dates previously discussed: Committee of Senate (Please specify)

University Executive Committee or Sub-Committee (if applicable)

University Executive Committee, 14th June 2016

Other (Please specify): Executive Summary of Paper: This paper sets out proposals to increasing the clarity, academic coherency and attractiveness of Keele’s course portfolio and curriculum, simplifying the current offer, which is very large and complex, lacks coherency and is hard to very difficult to articulate to our market. The proposals involve retaining Keele’s strength in and commitment to ‘Dual Honours’ as a key part of our portfolio, whilst recognising the increasing success and continued growth of more specialist and integrated ‘Single Honours’ programmes.

The overriding academic principle is to ensure we provide a high quality research-led contemporary education and student experience and produce high quality, employable graduates, whilst at the same time ensure staff have sufficient time for research to help deliver the university’s significant research ambitions as a research-led university in an increasingly competitive external research environment, as well as to deliver high quality teaching and learning and student support, reducing pressures on administrative staff time in both Schools and Directorates and Schools as student numbers continue to grow, in an environment of significantly increasing cost pressures within the HE sector.

Specific proposals are included centred around: - reshaping and simplifying Keele’s academic portfolio, very significantly reducing the number of available routes from over 1,800 to effectively around 120 subject combinations, removing combinations with no or minimal demand, and moving away from the traditional Dual Honours offering of two completely separate subjects, with a focus on creating coherent, integrated and combined degree programmes and cognate subject combinations, alongside more specialist degrees - increasing and standardising the minimum number of subject credits for all three year degrees to 270 (and 360 for four year degrees), increasing the minimum number of subject credits in each year to 90 (from 60 at present) - that ‘Major/Minor’ degrees are no longer identified by separate routes, whilst retaining the ability for students to focus on one discipline in the final year and graduate with a ‘X with Y’, (e.g. Geology with Physical Geography) rather than an ‘X and Y’ degree ((e.g. Geology and Physical Geography). A minimum of 90 subjects will be required in a discipline in the final year to ‘Major’ in that discipline. - reducing the number of different module types from five at present to three – compulsory, optional and elective

The paper also includes a wider update on the project, centred around increasing the attractiveness and relevance of Keele’s academic portfolio and curriculum; freeing up staff time for research, high quality teaching and student support; reducing pressures on administrative staff time in both Schools and Directorates and Schools as student numbers continue to grow; and work relating to reducing pressures on teaching space. Key Discussion Points for the Committee: Senate is asked to consider the paper and to approve the specific proposals in the paper: - simplifying Keele’s academic portfolio to a more coherent and easily articulated offering, reducing the number of available routes for which there is no or minimal demand

S 22JUNE2016 A7 Cover Sheet for Senate and its Sub-Committees

Action required from the Committee Agenda Category: Action Sought: Please the

relevant action Policy/Strategy (for substantive discussion)

For Discussion For Information For Formal Approval

Formal Approval (for limited discussion or starred item)

Formal Approval For Ratification (for Senate only)

Recommend Approval to Council Recommend Approval Report Item For Information Reserved Agenda For all matters of a confidential nature relating to individual staff or students

Strategic Fit and Risk Management

Key Corporate Risks (Please key corporate risk(s) relevant to the proposal)

RISK01: HE & other policy changes RISK02: Estates Infrastructure RISK03: Public Funding Cuts RISK04: Staffing RISK05: External Stakeholder Engagement RISK06: CPD and Enterprise RISK07: Financial Sustainability RISK08: Student Numbers Growth RISK09: Research RISK10: Investment losses RISK11: Contracts and Compliance RISK12: University Reputation RISK13: Immigration policy/statutory duties RISK14: IT security RISK15: Pensions RISK16: Science Park and the Innovation Centres

University Strategic Plan (Please the relevant strategic aim(s) of the proposal

Aim 1: Broad-based University of about 10,000 students Aim 2: Highest quality student experience Aim 3: International excellence and impact in research Aim 4: Contribute positively to communities we serve Aim 5: Environmentally aware and sustainable campus community

Aim 6: Manage and develop resources effectively

Equality and Diversity (Please delete as appropriate)

Does the proposal have relevance to equality?

Yes No N/A

Is an equality impact assessment in place for the proposal?

Yes No N/A

- that ‘Major/Minor’ degrees are no longer identified by separate routes - reducing the number of different module types from five to three - compulsory, optional and elective - increasing and standardising the minimum number of subject credits for all three year degrees to 270, increasing the minimum number of subject credits in each year to 90. - that a minimum of 90 subject credits in a discipline in the final year will be required to ‘Major’ in that discipline. Brief Summary of Paper for the Senate Newsletter (Maximum 3 lines)

1 | P a g e

Reshaping and Simplification of Keele’s Academic Portfolio and Curriculum: Increasing clarity, academic coherency and attractiveness

1. Introduction

The Portfolio and Curriculum Development (PCD) project in part goes back to a study which focused on modelling the implications on teaching space of the ambitious increase in student growth identified in the 2015-2020 Strategic Plan, and led to the notion of the need for a Timetabling and Curriculum Project.

Further discussions with Schools, including an away day in summer 2015, attended by Deans, Heads of Schools, Faculty Directors of Learning and Teaching, Faculty Business Managers revealed, in addition to the pressures on teaching space and timetabling, a consistent message that included a number of important academic themes:

• The pressures on staff time, restricting time for research, teaching excellence and student support

• The importance of providing a high quality research-led education and student experience and producing high quality, employable graduates

• Simplification of the overarching curriculum structures

• Clearer guidance on credit requirements

• The sheer size and complexity of Keele’s undergraduate portfolio and the challenges of articulating and marketing such a large and complex portfolio

• The importance of maintaining ‘Dual Honours’ as a key part of Keele’s portfolio, whilst recognising the increasing success and continued growth of ‘Single Honours’ programmes

• The importance of providing interdisciplinarity and breadth in our curriculum

• The attractiveness of maintaining electives, but the need to reduce elective choice

• Prioritisation of Modern Language provision

Consequently, in September, much more of an academic focus was given to the project led by the new Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Provost, focusing in particular on reshaping, rearticulating and redefining Keele’s academic portfolio and curriculum, with particular aims centred around the following themes and principles:

• Providing a high quality research-led contemporary education and student experience and producing high quality, employable graduates

• Increasing the clarity, academic coherency and attractiveness of Keele’s course portfolio and curriculum, particularly in the context of the significant, progressively increasing uptake onto and demand for more specialist ‘single honours’ programmes (67% of 2015/16 intake; 80% of 2016/17 applications), simplifying the current offer, which is very large and complex, lacks coherency and is hard to very difficult to articulate to our market (see Annexes 1 and 2).

• Retaining Keele’s strength in and commitment to ‘Dual Honours’ as a key part of our portfolio, whilst recognising the increasing success and continued growth of more specialist and integrated ‘Single Honours’ programmes.

2 | P a g e

• Ensuring that our integrated Foundation Year continues to be an important and distinctive part of our portfolio, providing progression routes onto all degree programmes.

• Retaining our commitment to breadth and increasing interdisciplinarity within our curriculum • Increased emphasis on improving the employability and attractiveness of our graduates to

employers • Freeing up staff time for research to help deliver the university’s significant research growth

ambitions as a research-led university in an increasingly competitive external research environment, as well as for high quality teaching and learning and teaching enhancement activities, in an environment of significantly increasing cost pressures that the HE sector is facing.

• Simplification of the overarching curriculum structures and clearer guidance on credit requirements • Increased efficiency and reduced administrative burden of staff in Schools and Directorates,

particularly in the context of the very ambitious planned growth in undergraduate student numbers by 2020.

• Improving student attainment • Better and more efficient use of space to reduce the increasing pressures on timetabling and

teaching and learning spaces as student numbers continue to grow, to help ensure the best possible student experience and minimise the use of less desirable teaching spaces (such as the gymnasium and ballroom), and teaching slots after 5.00 pm.

There are numerous interconnected aspects to the project in order to deliver some of the intended strategic objectives. This paper includes specific proposals in relation to our overall course portfolio and academic offering, the overarching curriculum structure and subject credit requirements, as well as summarising some of the work that has been undertaken in relation to the pressures on teaching and learning space and actions being taken which will help to address some of these pressures.

2. Academic Portfolio

Keele has a very large and complex portfolio, offering over 1,800 different Routes during the last Admissions Cycle, 62% of which have received no applications in the last two years.

90% of all applications were for only 6.9% of our available Routes, or put another way only 10% of our applications were for over 1,700 different routes.

In 2015/16 over two thirds of our intake enrolled on single honours programmes, a significant increase from a few years ago, and 2016/17 has, as expected, seen a further significant increase in the proportion of applications for single honours programmes from 73.9% in 2015/16 to 79.2% this cycle.

The aim is to simplify the portfolio to enable a much clearer and more coherent articulation of Keele’s academic offer, based around the ability to specialise in one discipline, take interdisciplinary integrated degrees or combine two disciplines, in a way which will enable us to enhance our ability to market and enhance our portfolio and more effectively market integrated degrees and specific combinations which offer academic synergies and are attractive to applicants.

The difficulty of marketing specific combinations of disciplines is highlighted in Annexes 1 and 2 which show respectively how History and Business at Keele appear on the UCAS website, something which as an institution we have no control over. Exactly the same is true of the Unistats website, which again we have

3 | P a g e

no control over, and presentation of Key Information Sets, where every route is required to have its own Key Information Set.

Taking History (Annex 1), if a prospective student is interested in studying History and is considering Keele amongst the 132 institutions which offer a History degree, the first UCAS results screen only brings back five courses, those which UCAS regard as ‘single subject’, which includes the current ‘Major’ options. Clicking at the bottom of the screen on ‘View all relevant courses at Keele University’ brings up a secondary list with 102 options spread over 6 pages. History and Politics attracts the highest number of applications of our very extensive range of possible Dual Honours and Major/Minor History combinations, yet does not appear on the list until page 5 after some 80 other possible combinations, simply as a function of the alphabetical listing that UCAS employs.

Taking Business (Annex 2), the situation is even more extreme with 275 different providers offering Business degrees. The first UCAS results screen for Business / Keele also brings back five courses, those which UCAS regard as ‘single subject’, two of which are outside of the Management School. Clicking at the bottom of the screen on ‘View all relevant courses at Keele University’ brings up a secondary list with 212 options spread over 11 pages. Economics and Finance receives a high number of applications each year, but simply appears mid-way through the list of 212 possible courses on page 5 with no higher visibility than any of the other 211 possible courses, as a function of the alphabetical and comprehensive, non-prioritised course listing approach that UCAS employs.

It is proposed to remove Routes where there is no or minimal demand. Although removing such routes will take away a small number of applicants (less than 3% of total applications), this needs to be offset against the significant recruitment and academic benefits of having a far more defined, coherent and attractive academic offer, which is much easier to articulate, and the much enhanced ability to directly market and promote integrated degrees and specific combinations of disciplines which offer academic synergies and are attractive to applicants as distinctive coherent combined or integrated degrees, in addition to our increasingly successful specialist degrees.

In addition, a good proportion of the effected students may very well still choose to apply to Keele due to particularly wanting to come to Keele or having a strong preference for one of their two subjects, and hence choose another combination or to specialise in one of their subjects.

As well as the obvious academic benefits of having a more coherent, relevant and attractive academic offering and making it easier to articulate and market Keele’s academic portfolio in an extremely competitive and highly marketised recruitment environment, significantly reducing the number of routes and simplifying the portfolio will bring significant timetabling benefits, reducing some of the current pressures on timetabling and allocation of teaching space, and also reduce increasing pressures on administrative time in both Directorates and Schools as student numbers continue to grow.

Rather than thinking in terms of removing routes with no or minimal demand, the alternative bottom up approach of creating a portfolio which is built up from a specific number of combinations (combined degrees) based on evidenced market demand and academic synergies within the constraints of the three block timetable has been adopted.

It is important to emphasise that there are no plans to remove any disciplines from our existing portfolio as a consequence of the Portfolio and Curriculum Development Project. The intention is to change how we position and promote Keele academic portfolio, removing Routes (disparate combinations) where there is no or minimal demand, giving a much simpler, less complex, more coherent academic portfolio,

4 | P a g e

that is much easier to articulate and market, one which gives emphasises specialist, integrated and combined degrees consisting of subjects with obvious academic synergies or popular combinations.

One of the problems with the current route based system is that where Schools and programme teams have developed additional pathways within a particular discipline, (e.g. Astrophysics (Physics), Medicinal Chemistry (Chemistry), Human Biology (Biology), Physical/Human Geography (Geography), these are treated as separate routes (in most cases with themselves having additional Major and Minor variants), even though many of the modules are common to the different named routes, and there is significant commonality of teaching and administration with single programme committee, exam boards, etc. and they cannot be combined with each other. Where such pathways exist and cannot be combined with each other, existing in the same timetable block, routes have been aggregated as disciplines.

Applying this approach to the 2015/16 applications results in almost exactly 100 (102) subject combinations which received 10 or more applications (which suggests some level of academic synergy or attractiveness of the combination), which starts to get close to the number of specific combinations we might wish to have in our portfolio given the size of the institution, and a factor of ten less than the current number of routes.

However, this approach does favour the strongest recruiting disciplines, and works against the least well recruiting disciplines, and therefore risks compounding their lower recruitment, although it should be noted that almost all disciplines now have a specialist (‘single honours’) route. If one separately takes the five most popular combinations for every discipline and for those disciplines where there are not five combinations receiving over 10 applications, those combinations which recruited two or more students (which apart from at the margins again suggests some academic synergy or attractiveness of combination), this gives potentially up to 24 further combinations to the above, giving a total of around 125 subject combinations across the institution.

In some Schools with a large number of programmes, such as Keele Management School, there is clearly scope for further simplification of the portfolio through the development of coherent integrated degree programmes and reducing the number of intra-School Dual Honours combinations. A school-level review of the portfolio in KMS is currently in progress aimed at simplifying the portfolio, particularly in relation to Dual Honours combinations.

The resulting ca. 120 subject combinations will offer a much greater level of academic synergy than the current ‘almost anything with anything’ Dual Honours offering (which is manifested in how Keele’s course portfolio appears on UCAS), and would provide a much better basis to articulate and promote a much simpler, more coherent course portfolio of specialist, integrated and distinctive combined degrees, all of which have progression routes through our integrated Foundation Year, moving away from the traditional multidisciplinary Dual Honours offering. The simpler portfolio will actually allow better promotion of integrated and combined degrees than at present, including on UCAS and Unistats, and it is hoped will give such degrees greater prominence and traction.

It is recognised that there are potentially attractive combinations of disciplines that we currently are unable to offer because they sit in the same timetable block. The mapping of disciplines across blocks was done in a way to optimise the number of popular combinations for each discipline, but inevitably there are some disciplines which reside in the same timetable block which might be potentially attractive combinations, but are precluded. This will continue to be the case in the short-term. However, as the number of routes are significantly reduced and pressures on the timetable become less acute, then the

5 | P a g e

possibility of introducing new combinations, which are currently precluded, for which there is evidenced demand across the sector, becomes more feasible.

Major/Minor

At present all Major/Minor combinations have a separate route, in many cases creating three routes for every subject combination, contributing very significantly to the huge number of routes, the number of options on the Keele ‘discipline’ UCAS and UNISTATS webpages and adding both complexity and a substantial administrative overhead. It is felt that the specific terminology Major/Minor brings very little added benefit to offset the various problems and complexities its use generates, including generating hundreds of extra routes.

In reshaping and simplifying Keele’s academic portfolio, it will still be perfectly possible to specialise in one of the two combined subjects in the final year of study, or indeed change pathway from for example Physics to Astrophysics or Chemistry to Medicinal Chemistry after year one, and this will be actively promoted in the prospectus, website and recruitment literature and on Open and Offer Holder Days, but it is proposed that such degrees are simply classified as X with Y (e.g. Geology with Physical Geography) rather than X and Y (Geology and Physical Geography), with the ‘with’ reflecting specialising in one subject in the final year, rather than as Major/Minor variants. Major/minor routes currently require different UCAS codes and separate routes and pathways within Keele, adding further complexity to the articulation of Keele’s portfolio and to external presentation of Keele’s courses, such as on the UCAS and Unistats websites and during clearing, as well as adding a significant administrative burden.

It is proposed that Major/Minor degrees are no longer identified by separate routes.

Articulation of ‘Dual Honours’ degrees

There are numerous examples of current popular Dual Honours combinations which could be very easily and persuasively presented as coherent integrated or combined degree programmes, for example, Business and Marketing, Business and Finance, Economics and Finance, Politics and International Relations, Physical Geography/Geography and Geology, Mathematics and Physics, Psychology and Criminology, Psychology and Neuroscience, Biochemistry and Biology, Chemistry and Forensic Science, many of which are taught from within the same School, rather than two completely separate strands as at present, and there is clearly opportunity to much more strongly promote these and further develop them as distinctive, attractive degree programmes through bridging and interdisciplinary modules (whilst obviously trying to avoid a proliferation of new modules). In some Schools with a large number of programmes, as noted above, there is certainly scope for further simplification of the portfolio through the development of coherent integrated degree programmes and the reducing the number of intra-School Dual Honours combinations.

In addition there are many cognate subject combinations which, whilst perhaps not having the numbers of applications and students of the above, have the synergies and cognateness to be presented as attractive subject combinations for a X and Y / X with Y / Y with X combined degree.

In terms of shaping Keele’s future academic offering future work will focus on trying to embed greater levels of interdisciplinarity into both specialist, integrated and combined honours programmes, (recognising that there are already some excellent examples of interdisciplinarity, particularly in some of the relatively recently developed integrated degrees), and place a strong emphasis on research-led

6 | P a g e

teaching, including independent research study, with more expectation around 30 credit independent research projects and dissertations, including specifically encouraging interdisciplinary and trans-disciplinary independent study projects in combined degrees. Interdisciplinarity and research-led teaching are prominent in our 2015-2020 University strategy and our new Learning and Teaching Strategy, and in our identity as a broad-based integrated campus research-led university, and will be a key part of our narrative in the forthcoming Teaching Excellence Framework.

3. Module Types

The ‘New Degree Structure’ introduced in 2007 created five different types of modules; Core, Core Option, Programme Electives, Programme Approved Electives and Free Standing Electives.

This is found to be confusing by both staff and especially students, and provides a very significant additional level of complication both in the timetabling of modules, and also for students in the module selection process leading to student dissatisfaction, as well as consuming lots of staff time. The administrative teams in PAA and Schools spend a large proportion of time resolving ‘module diet’ issues due to students having selected the wrong ‘type’ of module.

It is proposed to move to a much simpler system with three types of Modules; Compulsory, Optional and Elective, removing Programme Electives and Programme Approved Electives.

Compulsory and Optional modules will both contribute to Subject Credit requirements. As is currently the case a given module may be ‘core’ for one pathway and an ‘option’ for another, although this will be more clearly articulated, and indeed may be offered as an elective to other programmes (within timetabling constraints). In order to reduce some of the timetabling complexities, a less permissive, more constrained system of elective choice is also required. Increasing minimum subject credits, as outlined below, further reduces the need for five types of modules.

4. Curriculum – Subject credits

There are currently significant differences and inconsistencies in the minimum credit requirements required for three year Single Honours (SH) (255 credits), Dual Honours (DH) (240 (2 x 120) credits)) and especially Major/Minor (MM) (315 credits), which are hard to justify or rationalise pedagogically.

The number of subject credits required to obtain named Single Honours and Dual Honours degrees at 255 and 240 (2 x 120) credits out of 360 credits in a three year programme is low relative to the sector, and is particularly low in the first two years (level 4 and 5), where currently only 60 subject credits out of 120 are required, with only 30 credits required in each discipline in Dual Honours programmes, in terms of acquiring an appropriate academic grounding in these disciplines.

In addition, data aggregated from the last four years shows that the proportion of good honours degrees decreases markedly the fewer subject credits students take in their degree, with good degree outcomes being 11% less for students with fewer than 300 subject credits than those with higher numbers of subject credits.

Increasing the minimum subject credit requirements will provide greater academic coherence, help free up staff time, improve degree outcomes, including the proportion of good degrees, and reduce pressures

7 | P a g e

on timetabling and teaching space, and enable earlier and more reliable delivery of timetables to students, helping improve their experience, and staff.

It is proposed that the minimum subject credit requirements for three year degrees be increased and standardised at 270 credits (and 360 credits for four year integrated Masters degrees), with a minimum of 90 credits in each year (and a minimum of 45 subject credits in each discipline in a combined degree).

In reality almost all students currently do in excess of 90 subject credits at Level 6, with 98% taking 120 subject credits at Level 6, and so under these proposals almost all students will take a minimum of 300 subject credits in a three year degree. This is even more the case for students taking four year integrated Masters degrees.

As noted in section 2 it is proposed that ‘X with Y’ is used as the terminology rather than Major/Minor, where students choose to focus on one of their two disciplines in the third/final year, for example, ‘Geology with Physical Geography’ rather than ‘Geography and Physical Geography’.

It is proposed that a minimum of 90 subject credits in that discipline in the final year will be required to ‘Major’ in that discipline and receive an ‘X with Y’ degree rather than an ‘X and Y’ degree

Increasing the minimum number of subject credits per year to 90 credits, still leaves students up to 30 credits free to select elective modules, including studying Modern Language modules (and other electives including business, sustainability related modules, etc.) and achieve a Language Competency or Advanced Competency. Students would also be able, as they are now, to study Modern Language Modules outside of their degree.

5. Reducing numbers of modules and increased use of 30 credit modules

Freeing up staff time to undertake high quality research, and undertake high quality teaching and learning and provide high levels of student support, and making more efficient use of administrative time and teaching space, in part relates to the number of modules offered by programmes. Analysis suggests that overall we offer a large number of modules for the number of undergraduate (and postgraduate) students we have. This is also borne out by National League Tables, which show Keele has a favourable student:staff ratio. Whilst this is partly due to the considerable work that has gone into optimising our student:staff ratio in our annual HESA return, this also suggests we operate a large number of modules for an institution of Keele’s size, given staff workloads are high, as well as highlighting some of the administrative inefficiencies of operating such a large and complex Dual Honours system.

As undergraduate student numbers continue to grow substantially over the next few years, together with the effect of the proposals in this paper, this situation will improve considerably, but there is clearly a balance to be struck between student choice and the number of option and elective modules offered by Schools and programme teams in terms of the key objectives of freeing up staff time and resource to support research excellence, and providing genuine teaching excellence and enhancement and student support in an increasingly resource-constrained environment in the context of the Teaching Excellence Framework. Reducing the total number of modules running will also ease some of the pressures around availability of teaching space.

8 | P a g e

Whilst much work has been done in recent years, Schools and programme teams are encouraged to continue give very careful consideration to the number of option and elective modules they offer within particular degree programmes.

In addition, where pedagogically appropriate, increased use of 30 credit modules by disciplines is also strongly encouraged, given the significant administrative overhead for both academic and administrative staff associated with running, assessing and administering modules, and in many cases pedagogic advantages of larger modules. Clearly, there should be no overall reduction in student contact time in establishing 30 credit modules, but significant academic and administrative staff time savings associated with module administration and assessment.

6. Pressures on teaching space and Timetabling

In parallel to the work on refining the portfolio and curriculum, activity is also focusing on the pressures on teaching space and timetabling, and the increasing strain and demand on teaching space we are experiencing due to the significant growth in student numbers. This demand will further increase with the significant further growth in undergraduate numbers we are targeting over the next few years. This activity is looking at trying to address some of the difficulties faced by Schools and the Central Timetabling Unit in creating the 2015/16 timetable and also in finding suitable teaching space at short notice during the year, particularly at some times during the week, which we need to continue to resolve, to make optimal use of our teaching and learning space, reduce the strain on our teaching space and the use of less desirable teaching space and teaching slots after 5.00 pm.

One of the quickest and most effective ways to address these difficulties, which impact on the student experience, is to ensure all our existing teaching and study space is utilised as effectively and fully as possible, and wherever possible teaching sessions take place in higher quality teaching space. The Central Timetabling Unit is currently responsible for only just over half of the total teaching capacity on campus, and there is very significant capacity of non-pool space, more than half of which is (or potentially is) non-specialist.

In short, we would like as much teaching space as possible currently managed by Schools to be accessible by the Central Timetabling Unit, who will work with Schools to ensure Schools retain priority bookings and access to space they have used previously. A model along these lines has worked very successfully between SPIRE and the Central Timetabling Unit for some time. All Schools have been asked to give some initial consideration to which rooms currently outside of the Pool/CTU's access are suitable for general teaching. Some Schools have already been very cooperative and supportive in this respect.

A detailed evaluation of learning spaces which currently sit outside of the Central Timetabling Unit, in particular non-specialist teaching space, has been undertaken in terms of its quality, capacity, usage and applicability, and the investment required to upgrade this space to a higher specification where necessary.

To date over 20 rooms across campus have been identified as rooms which are currently not accessible to the Central Timetabling Unit, which are suitable for general teaching, and could potentially be used in the 2016/17 academic year. There will be opportunity for Schools to discuss with the Central Timetabling Unit any particular concerns and requirements to support their academic delivery through 2016/17 and beyond.

9 | P a g e

Colleagues from Audio Visual Services have conducted a survey to establish where technical updates and installations might be required to upgrade rooms to a higher specification, which will in turn benefit the Schools and buildings in which the rooms are located in terms of improving the quality of rooms they regularly use.

This is very much about trying to make the best use of our existing space to the benefit of students and academic and administrative staff, both in terms of minimising teaching sessions after 6.00 pm and improving the quality of our teaching space.

The feasibility of using attendance monitoring to properly assess room usage and occupancy is also currently being explored.

7. Next Steps

Senate is asked to consider and approve the proposals within the paper, which are summarised below, for full implementation with the 2017/18 Foundation Year intake, followed by the direct entry undergraduate intake in 2018/19.

However, many of the academic principles within the paper, including increased use of 30 credit modules, careful consideration of the total number of modules offered within a programme and a reduction in the number of elective modules, could be adopted at an earlier stage, and Schools and programmes are strongly encouraged to give active consideration to these at a much earlier stage, as a means to achieving some of the core project objectives of freeing up academic staff time for research, and to support high quality teaching and student support, and reduce increasing pressures on administrative time in both Schools and Directorates as student numbers continue to grow,

Effort will increasingly be focused into marketing and promoting specific popular combinations for 2017 entry in recruitment literature and campaigns, and at recruitment events, including Open Days.

8. Specific Proposals

1. It is proposed to remove Routes where there is no or minimal demand using the approach outlined in section 2.

2. It is proposed that Major/Minor degrees are no longer identified by separate entry routes, but that the ability to specialise in one discipline in the final year is still offered and simply classified as X with Y (e.g. Geology with Physical Geography) rather than X and Y (Geology and Physical Geography)

3. It is proposed to move to a much simpler system with three types of Modules; Compulsory, Optional and Elective, removing Programme Electives and Programme Approved Electives.

4. It is proposed that the minimum subject credit requirements for three year degrees be increased and standardised at 270 credits (and 360 credits for four year integrated Masters degrees), with a minimum of 90 credits in each year (and a minimum of 45 subject credits in each discipline in a combined degree).

5. It is proposed that a minimum of 90 subject credits in that discipline in the final year will be required to ‘Major’ in that discipline and receive an ‘X with Y’ degree rather than an ‘X and Y’ degree

10 | P a g e

Annex 1

UCAS Course Search: Example 1 – History A potential student is interested in studying History at Keele. The first results screen brings back only five records, those which UCAS regard as ‘Single Subject’, although they also include Major options.

Clicking on ‘View all relevant courses at Keele University’ brings up a secondary list with 102 options spread over 6 pages. History and Politics attracts the highest number of applications for our wide range of History Dual Honours combinations, yet only appears on page 5.

Annex 2

UCAS Course Search: Example 2 – Business A potential student is interested in studying Business at Keele. The first results screen brings back only five records; those which UCAS regard as ‘Single Subject’, although they also include a Major option.

Clicking on ‘View all relevant courses at Keele University’ brings up a secondary list with 212 options spread over 11 pages. Economics and Finance receives a high number of applications each year, yet only appears on page 5.

Annex 3: Proposed retained subject combinations

Subject combinations with 10 or more applications

10 or Over Applications Subject Group Combination

Subject Group Description Applications

BUSMKT Business and Marketing 349 CRIPSY Criminology and Psychology 167 NEUPSY Neuroscience and Psychology 158 MATPHY Mathematics and Physics 148 BUSFIN Business and Finance 145 GEGGEO Geography and Geology 132 ECOFIN Economics and Finance 125 CRILAW Criminology and Law 109 CRISOC Criminology and Sociology 95 HISPOL History and Politics 93 BUSHRM Business and Human Resource Management 87 BUSECO Business and Economics 78 BCHBIO Biochemistry and Biology 77 BIOPSY Biology and Psychology 76 INTPOL International Relations and Politics 76 ENGHIS English and History 75 BUSLAW Business and Law 72 ACCBUS Accountancy and Business 66 BCHCHE Biochemistry and Chemistry 63 BCHNEU Biochemistry and Neuroscience 60 ECOMAT Economics and Mathematics 58 BIOFSC Biology and Forensic Science 57 MCCMKT Media, Communications and Culture and Marketing 55 BIOCHE Biology and Chemistry 52 BUSPSY Business and Psychology 49 CHEFSC Chemistry and Forensic Science 48 HISINT History and International Relations 47 PSYSOC Psychology and Sociology 44 PHIPSY Philosophy and Psychology 43 BUSINT Business and International Relations 42 CHEPHY Chemistry and Physics 40 LAWPOL Law and Politics 39 BUSGEG Business and Geography 38 COMMAT Computing and Mathematics 38 BIOMAT Biology and Mathematics 38 EDUSOC Education and Sociology 36 AMSHIS American Studies and History 36 COMPHY Computing and Physics 35 ECOPOL Economics and Politics 35

MATPHI Mathematics and Philosophy 34 EDUENG Education and English 31 CHENEU Chemistry and Neuroscience 30 ENGFST English and Film Studies 30 ENGPHI English and Philosophy 30 BIOEDU Biology and Education 29 PHIPOL Philosophy and Politics 29 ACCMAT Accountancy and Mathematics 29 CHEMAT Chemistry and Mathematics 28 MKTPSY Marketing and Psychology 28 EVSGEG Environmental Science and Geography 28 MATPSY Mathematics and Psychology 27 BIOGEG Biology and Geography 25 MATMUS Mathematics and Music 25 ECOHIS Economics and History 25 FSTMCC Film Studies and Media, Communications and Culture 24 GEOPHY Geology and Physics 24 ENGPSY English and Psychology 23 FSCPSY Forensic Science and Psychology 22 BUSCOM Business and Computing 22 ENGSOC English and Sociology 20 ECOPHI Economics and Philosophy 20 AMSENG American Studies and English 20 BUSMCC Business and Media, Communications and Culture 19 GEGSOC Geography and Sociology 17 BUSMAT Business and Mathematics 17 ESTGEG Environmental Studies and Geography 16 MUSMUT Music and Music Technology 16 INTSOC International Relations and Sociology 15 POLSOC Politics and Sociology 15 GEGMAT Geography and Mathematics 14 ENGMCC English and Media, Communications and Culture 14 HRMPSY Human Resource Management and Psychology 14 BIOGEO Biology and Geology 14 BUSCRI Business and Criminology 14 GEGPOL Geography and Politics 14 CRIHIS Criminology and History 14 EDUHIS Education and History 14 BIOEST Biology and Environmental Studies 14 ECOMKT Economics and Marketing 13 BUSPOL Business and Politics 13 BIOCRI Biology and Criminology 13 ACCPHY Accountancy and Physics 13 HRMMKT Human Resource Management and Marketing 13 FSCLAW Forensic Science and Law 13 FSCNEU Forensic Science and Neuroscience 13 MCCSOC Media, Communications and Culture and Sociology 13 HISPSY History and Psychology 12 LAWPHI Law and Philosophy 12 MUTPHY Music Technology and Physics 12

FYMCC Media, Communications and Culture Foundation Year 12 ECOSOC Economics and Sociology 12 GEGHIS Geography and History 12 BUSENG Business and English 11 BUSCHE Business and Chemistry 11 BUSMUT Business and Music Technology 11 ENGMUS English and Music 11 BIOEVS Biology and Environmental Science 11 INTMKT International Relations and Marketing 10 ENGINT English and International Relations 10 CHEGEO Chemistry and Geology 10 HISLAW History and Law 10 COMNEU Computing and Neuroscience 10 INTPHI International Relations and Philosophy 10 EDUMAT Education and Mathematics 10 ENGLAW English and Law 10

Additional proposed retained subject combinations

American Studies and Film Studies American Studies and Business American Studies and Politics Biochemistry and Business Environmental Studies and Business Environmental Studies and Economics Environmental Studies and International Relations Chemistry and Environmental Science Geology and Environmental Science Geology and Computer Science Computer Science and Finance Film Studies and Computer Science Finance and Psychology Education and Human Resource Management Human Resource Management and Accounting* English and Marketing Music / Music Technology and Psychology Music and Education Music and Law Music / Music Technology and Computer Science Music Technology and Neuroscience Criminology and Neuroscience