Docstoc

College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine

Document Sample
College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine Powered By Docstoc
					           College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine

  Postgraduate Programme Review of the School of Molecular and Clinical
                              Medicine


CONTENTS                                                      PAGES

  1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                                              2

  2. THE REVIEW STRUCTURE AND PROCESS
     2.1 Composition of the Review Panel
     2.2 Review Arrangements
     2.3 Review Documentation
     2.4 The Review Process

  3. OVERVIEW OF THE SCHOOL’S POSTGRADUATE PROVISION 3-9
     3.1 Operational Overview
     3.2 Programmes and Fields of Study
     3.3 Admissions and Recruitment
     3.4 Postgraduate Administration Support within the School
     3.5 Accommodation and Resources

  4. PROVISION OF RESEARCH DEGREES                                  9-12
     4.1 Review Arrangements
     4.2 Admissions and Induction
     4.3 Student Supervision
     4.4 Student Progression and Completion Rates
     4.5 Research Training
     4.6 Accommodation and Resources
     4.7 Student Support
     4.8 Funding

  5. PROVISION OF TAUGHT MASTERS                                    12-14
     5.1 Review Arrangements
     5.2 Admissions
     5.3 Student Representation
     5.4 Quality Assurance and Enhancement
     5.5 Funding

  6. CONCLUSION                                                     14-16
     6.1 Summary of Commendations
     6.2 Summary of Recommendations




                                                                 Page 1
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Postgraduate Programme Review in the School of Molecular and Clinical
Medicine (MCM) was conducted on Thursday 21 and Friday 22 May 2009, and
consisted of interviews with the Head of School, Professor Stuart Ralston, the
Postgraduate Director, Professor Sarah Howie, key members of staff from all
component subject areas, and postgraduate students. The panel also visited key
facilities used by the School at the Western General Hospital (WGH), which hosts
the bulk of the School. Staff and students are also located at the Edinburgh Royal
Hospital and at Little France, depending on their academic and research
affiliations.

The School has some issues associated with being a multi-site and multi-
disciplinary organisation. In general, students and staff feel part of one School;
however there are still areas where this could be improved. This has been
compounded by the University administrative databases, which often fail to
assign students to the correct Schools, and still assign them to old Divisions and
Departments that no longer exist. This leads to some staff and students being
confused about which School/Centre/Division they belong to. However, it was
clear from the review that both staff and students were aware of the support
mechanisms in place should problems arise. The School recognises these issues
and has taken a great deal of time to make improvements, through the
enthusiasm and hard work of the staff and students, led by Professor Stuart
Ralston and Professor Sarah Howie.

The University has encouraged growth of postgraduate numbers and financial
incentives have been provided in the case of Online Distance Learning (OLDL)
Programmes. The School has responded with the introduction of two OLDL
Programmes with aspirations for further expansions in this area. Although this
growth, in terms of student numbers and programmes, was commendable, the
School would need to bear in mind the consequent heavy impact that expansion
had on staff time and what the overall financial rewards would be, as the first
students had yet to graduate with Masters Degrees. The need to expedite
updated Business Plans for the future was highlighted as a priority.




                                                                       Page 2
2. THE REVIEW STRUCTURE AND PROCESS

2.1 Composition of the Review Panel

The review panel comprised:

Professor Jeremy Bradshaw - Convener of the Review Panel and Head of the
Graduate School, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine

Professor Maggie Harnett - External Panel Member, Division of Immunology,
Infection and Inflammation, University of Glasgow

Dr Lesley McLellan - External Panel Member, Division of Medical Sciences,
University of Dundee

Professor Andrew Calder - Internal Panel Member, Quality Assurance, College
of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine

Dr Bernadette Dutia - Internal Panel Member, Royal (Dick) Veterinary School

Dr Paddy Hadoke - Internal Panel Member, School of Clinical Sciences and
Community Health

Dr Andrew Hall - Internal Panel Member, School of Biomedical Sciences

Professor Lindsay Sawyer – Internal Panel Member, School of Biological
Sciences

Ms Isabel Lavers - Panel Secretary, College of Medicine and Veterinary
Medicine

2.2 Review Arrangements

The review, which occurred on Thursday 21 and Friday 22 May 2009, took the
form of a series of meetings with relevant individuals and groups within the
School, looking at matters concerning:

   •   Strategic issues relating to postgraduate provision, meeting with the Head
       of School, Postgraduate Director, then subject heads and support staff
       from across the School.
   •   Postgraduate research programmes, meeting with Research Students,
       supervisors of Research Students and postgraduate research directors.
   •   Provision of taught masters, meeting with the programme teams.
   •   Administrative support.
   •   The panel also toured the School’s premises at the WGH.



                                                                       Page 3
2.3 Review Documentation

      The Review Panel considered the following documents:

PAPER

1              Summary of Postgraduate Provision in the School

2              MSc by Research (thesis only)/MPhil/PhD
2.1            School Supervised Postgraduate Students’ Handbook
2.2            PPR questionnaire for MPhil/PhD
2.3            A selection of first year and annual reports
2.4            A selection of examiners reports
2.5a           Information from Transkills
2.5b           Transkills Course Review Feedback
2.6            Transkills Course ‘Good Practice in PhD Research’
2.7            MRC HGU Induction Handbook
2.8            A sample of student theses was available for panel members to
               review on the day.

3              MSc Forensic Medicine and Science
3.1            Annual Review Questionnaire 2007-08
3.2            The current programme information

4              MSc Neuroimaging for Research
4.1            Annual Review Questionnaire
4.2            The current programme handbook

5              Other documentation
5.1            Minutes of meetings of the School Postgraduate Studies Committee
5.2            Specification of School and College Postgraduate Operations
5.3            College Manual of Resources for Postgraduate Supervisors
5.4            College Handbook for Postgraduate Research Students
5.5            University’s Code of Practice for Supervisors and Research
               Students
               (This is given to all Postgraduate Research Students.)
5.6            University’s Code of Practice for Taught Postgraduate Programmes
               (This is given to all Postgraduate Taught students.)
5.7            Code of Good Practice in Research

The documentation for points 5.8-5.9 was available on the web at the following
website addresses

5.8            University Postgraduate (Taught) Assessment Regulation



                                                                      Page 4
             http://www.acaffairs.ed.ac.uk/Regulations/Assessment/08-
             09/PGT.htm
5.9          University Postgraduate (Research) Assessment Regulations
             http://www.acaffairs.ed.ac.uk/Regulations/Assessment/08-
             09/PGR.htm
5.10         Guidelines for the Examination of Research Degrees
             http://www.acaffairs.ed.ac.uk/Regulations/Assessment/08-
             09/ResearchDegreeExamGuide.htm

The review panel commend Professor Sarah Howie and Mr Jim Nisbet on the
excellent paperwork that had been provided for the review.

2.4 The Review Process

The review was carried out under the rubric and practice recommendations
approved by the University’s Senatus Postgraduate Committee (SPGSC). The
process is aimed at enabling Schools to develop their postgraduate provision and
build in good practice, replacing the previous quinquennial review process of
individual programmes. The review is designed to look at the total postgraduate
provision of a School, including all taught programmes and research degrees,
and the supporting managerial and administrative structures and support. The
review process aims to take a longer-term view of schools to help them in their
postgraduate strategy, as well as reflecting on previous and current practice. The
review covers the last five years.

3. OVERVIEW OF THE SCHOOL’S POSTGRADUATE PROVISION

3.1 Operational Overview

The College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine has one Graduate School,
which administers the postgraduate provision for all four Schools within the
College. Confusion arises because students are registered in “Divisions” within
the School of MCM, which are now obsolete, and Research Students are located
within Research Centres, which are not recognised as Academic Units by the
University databases. This complex anomaly together with the multi-site
geography of the school can cause confusion for students and staff. In addition
Schools are not given access to the University’s Postgraduate Database, which
holds important information on Postgraduate Students, which makes information
gathering almost impossible. It was hoped this would be resolved with the
introduction of the EUCLID (Edinburgh University Complete Lifecycle Integrated
Development).

The panel recommends that the College raises the problems with postgraduate
registration with the University, as EUCLID may not be able to resolve the
problems in the foreseeable future.




                                                                       Page 5
The School is split across several sites and postgraduate students can be based
at any of the following sites:

   •   Western General Hospital, Crew Road
   •   Edinburgh Royal Infirmary Hospital, Little France
   •   Queen’s Medical Research Institute, Little France
   •   Royal Edinburgh Hospital, Morningside

However, the bulk of the School is based on the WGH site; the Molecular
Medicine Centre and the Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre, together with the
Medical Research Council (MRC) and Human Genetics Unit, constitute the new
Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine (IGMM). The IGMM was launched
in 2007 with a mission to identify molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying
normal human development and diseases, including cancer, and to translate
these findings for clinical benefit. The School comprises three interdisciplinary
research centres:

   •   Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences (incorporating Clinical Neurosciences
       and Psychiatry)
   •   The Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre (incorporating Oncology and
       most of Pathology)
   •   Molecular Medicine Centre (incorporating Gastroenterology, Medical
       Genetics, Psychiatric Genetics and Rheumatic Diseases)

In addition there are smaller Interdisciplinary Research Groups (IDGs) in Brain
Imaging and the Disorders of the Ageing Brain and nascent IDG in the genetics
of Complex Disease and Related Traits.

The School was recently awarded MRC clinical trials methodology hub status.

The School houses over 450 staff which comprises almost 50% Academic Staff
and 50% Support staff.

The Head of School, Professor Stuart Ralston has overall responsibility for the
provision of postgraduate teaching in the School. Professor Sarah Howie
convenes the School Postgraduate Studies Committee, which manages the
School postgraduate business and represents the School on the College
Postgraduate Studies Committee (CPGSC). The School Postgraduate Studies
Committee meets two to three times a session. Within each Research Centre
and Division there is a local Postgraduate Committee, which is responsible for
monitoring and assessments of individual students doing supervised
postgraduate research. The School Postgraduate Studies Committee has
representation from both students and staff and for session 2008-09 the
members are:

Professor Sarah Howie, MCM, Postgraduate Director, Division of Pathology


                                                                        Page 6
Dr Cathy Abbott, MCM deputy Postgraduate Director, Molecular Medicine
representative

Dr Susan Farrington, Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre representative

Professor Bob Bill, Medical Research Centre- Human Genetics Unit
representative

Dr Walter Muir, Division of Psychiatry representative

Professor Stephen Lawrie, Division of Neurosciences representative

Dr Alex Graham, MSc Forensic Medicine and Science representative

Dr Kaska Hempel, MSc Neuroimaging in Research representative

Mr Jim Nisbet, MCM School administrator

Ms Ellen Grunewald, Student representative

The role and remit of the School Postgraduate Committee was commended by
the panel as clear reporting lines were seen.

The panel commended the hard work that was carried out by Professor Sarah
Howie to integrate all units across the School.

3.2 Programmes and Fields of Study

The programmes under review were:

Research

Students register for PhD, MSc by Research or MPhil degrees.

The University’s Code of Practice for Supervisors and Research Students (Paper
5.5) is relevant to all non-structured research degree programmes. Where there
is cross-school supervision, students are registered in the School of their
Principal Supervisor.

Taught

The School runs two structured, part-time OLDL programmes:

MSc Forensic Medicine and Science
MSc Neuroimaging in Research



                                                                     Page 7
These programmes are administered as taught postgraduate programmes and
the University’s Code of Practice for Taught Postgraduate Programmes (paper
5.6) applies.

The School is currently exploring the possibility of expanding its OLDL
programmes and plans to introduce a new MSc in Clinical Trials in 2010/11.

3.3 Admissions and Recruitment

The School follows the College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine (CMVM)
admissions procedures and applicants are required to meet the University
admissions standards.

All the Research Centres participate in the annual College-wide advertising
campaign. The College Postgraduate Office has a dedicated part-time member of
staff who manages the advertising and marketing of programmes centrally.

3.4 Postgraduate Administrative Support within the School

The Programme Directors have responsibly for the academic management of the
programme and for the recruitment and selection of students. Administrative
support is provided at local level.

The panel was impressed by the achievements of the support staff and praised
them for their dedication, hard work and contribution to the growth and
development of the School. They were clearly valued, worked extremely hard in
all areas and coped admirably with the constant challenges – in particular with
the introduction of EUCLID. At present administrative support was centred on
IGMM Research Students and OLDL Programmes, while support for students in
other divisions was provided locally. Concern was raised that administrative
support was only provided on a part-time basis for IGMM and much of this time
was taken up with particular areas that could perhaps be better administered by
academic staff.

The panel commends the dedication and hard work of Pauline McDonald.

The panel recommends that the School consider employing Pauline McDonald
on a full-time basis so that she could provide administrative support to all
Postgraduate Research Areas.

The Panel recommends that the School examine Pauline McDonald’s workload
to see if some work could be better assigned to Academic staff.

3.5 Accommodation and Resources




                                                                      Page 8
The panel was given a tour of the facilities at the WGH, which included laboratory
space and desk space:

   •   Cancer Research Building
   •   Medical Education Centre
   •   Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facility
   •   Molecular Medicine Centre
   •   Medical Research Centre – Human Genetics Unit
   •   WGH Library

PhD students are well provided with dedicated desk space in shared offices for
Postgraduate Research Students and social areas are also provided in each of
the main buildings. Students also have space in the Laboratories.

PROVISION OF RESEARCH DEGREES

4.1 Review Arrangements

The panel conducted interviews with a group of Postgraduate Research
Directors, Postgraduate Research Supervisors and a group of Postgraduate
Research Students. It was noted that although the School hosts a number of
part-time MD students they were not considered to belong to the School as they
were registered to the College.

The panel recommends that the College should continue its review of the MD
degree.

The panel recommends that the Postgraduate College Office identify all the MD
students in the College and pass this information on to the relevant Schools.

4.2 Admissions and Induction

The Research Centres hosted by the School follow the College of Medicine and
Veterinary Medicine (CMVM) admissions procedures and applicants are required
to meet the University admissions standards.

Programme Directors and Research Supervisors have responsibility for the
recruitment and selection of the students with the Postgraduate Director having
overall responsibility for ensuring the correct offers of research places are made.

The College Postgraduate Office is responsible for the initial stages of screening
applications and passing to appropriate Programme Directors and Research
Supervisors. For Research Students this is normally done after students have
been selected at competitive interview for quota places before then applying
through the University’s application form. As of 2009 September, with the
introduction of the University’s new Online Application processes, EUCLID,


                                                                         Page 9
applicants have been able to apply directly online and paper applications have
largely become redundant. Although this has helped speed up the application
process for applicants this has not been without problems for staff administering
the processes and accepting applicants. The School has worked closely with the
College Postgraduate Office to ensure processes and procedures are in place. A
great deal of work has been carried out by Pauline McDonald to track
applications in IGMM and make sure appropriate offers have been made and
timescales met. However, as the School Postgraduate Director is no longer
formally required to physically sign off student offers, concern was raised that
some Supervisors may not be qualified to make offers, and no-one was able to
take an over-view of the whole process.

The panel recommends that the School continue to work closely with the
College Postgraduate Office to monitor the Research Offers that are made to
applicants.

Research Students starting in September attend University-wide, College and
School Induction events. For non-September starts students attend a “Good
Practice in PhD Research “ induction session organised by the Transkills Unit
held at different locations across the College whenever these are available.

4.3 Student Supervision

The majority of Research Students were satisfied with their University
experience. Supervisors are proposed locally and appointed by the Head of
School. Attendance at the Supervisor’s Training Event is mandatory for
supervisors every five years – the Head of School has heavily encouraged this.
Professor Howie pointed out that the Transkills web page causes confusion by
stating that the course is for new Supervisors. There was some concern that
some Supervisors were supervising too many Research Students, which was not
in the interest of staff or students. In addition it was reported that often Post-Docs
were heavily involved in supervision of students but this was not registered and,
therefore, they did not receive formal recognition for it.

The panel commends the work being done by the School to ensure its
supervisors attended the Supervisor Training event as in some areas across the
University there was some reluctance to attend.

It is recommended that where both supervisors are in a relationship, they should
not be supervising the same student because of possible conflict of interests.

It is recommended that the School ensure Supervisors did not take on the
supervision of too many students at any one time – no more than one new
student each session was recommended.




                                                                          Page 10
It is recommended that the University should work towards greater recognition
of the contribution of Post-Docs as day-to-day supervisors.

4.4 Student Progression and Completion Rates

The programme statistics shown in table 2.1 (Paper 2.2) are slightly skewed as
the Cancer Research UK PhD programme is four-years long.

Students who have submitted beyond their allowed due dates had done so for a
variety of reasons, many of which include an Extension or Interruption to Studies.
Requests for these must be approved by the Principal Supervisor before being
formally approved by the CPGSC.

The arrangements for annual student progression follow College and University
guidelines. Each student is either assigned a Thesis Committee with an
independent chair. The review processes include a 10-week plan, first year report
and second year presentation of work. Students are given written feedback after
the first year’s assessment and oral feedback thereafter. All reports are signed off
at School level. The University-wide reporting forms were thought to be too
generic and did not give supervisors the opportunity to leave full comments.

The panel recommends that the College investigates the possibly of using
College specific reporting forms for Research Students.

4.5 Research Training

The College has a policy of encouraging students to attend Transkills courses as
appropriate during their studies. Roberts Postgraduate funding is used for this
purpose. The multi-site nature of the School means that students are sometimes
reluctant to attend seminars at different locations because of significant travelling
time.

4.6 Accommodation and Resources

The students interviewed by the panel were satisfied with the computer and
library facilities, laboratory and office accommodation provided for them.
Students commented that they rarely used the physical library facilities as most
journals are available electronically.

The Panel commend the provision of social areas for the students in each of the
IGMM buildings.

4.7 Student Representation

Students, although often confused about their School/centre/division, were
clearly aware of the support mechanisms in place should problems arise. In



                                                                         Page 11
general, students commented that they felt they belonged to the University,
except for those based at the Royal Edinburgh Hospital who felt isolated due to
its location and the small numbers of staff and students. In general, students felt
they had ample opportunity to feedback informally through their supervisor and
members of the School Postgraduate Committee. There was formal student
representation on their School Postgraduate Committee.

The panel recommends that the School explore ways in which it could further
integrate students from the Royal Edinburgh Hospital.

Students are to be commended on organising their own away day.

4.8 PhD Funding

Staff interviewed felt that the issue of running costs was problematic, especially
the disparity between the well-supported four year Wellcome Trust students and
Research Council students, who only received minimal research costs. This
placed pressure on some students to complete in three years, because they did
not have funds for a longer period of study, or to pay higher running costs.
Supervisors may feel more inclined to take on students who have more realistic
research costs paid.

The panel recommends that the College investigate the disparity of running
costs for different Research Students and further recommends that the
University provides studentships with comparable stipends and running costs.

PROVISION OF TAUGHT MASTERS

5.1 Review Arrangements

In addition to interviewing the Head of School, Professor Stuart Ralston and the
Postgraduate Director, Professor Sarah Howie the panel conducted interviews
with the Programme Directors Professor Joanna Wardlaw (MSc Neuroimaging
for Research), Dr Alex Graham (MSc Forensic Medicine and Science) and Dr
Kaska Hempel (programme support for MSc Neuroimaging for Research).

Unfortunately, due to the nature of OLDL programmes, it had not been possible
to find any students who were available for a videoconference interview. It was
noted that the panel would email the students with relevant questions in order for
them to give feedback. It was reported that the students are given a chance to
feedback though a national survey and would shortly be given a chance to
feedback via a University OLDL questionnaire and the outcomes would be taken
into account for the purposes of the review.


5.2 Admissions



                                                                        Page 12
The two OLDL programmes follow the College of Medicine and Veterinary
Medicine (CMVM) admissions procedures and applicants are required to meet
the University admissions standards.

The programmes are part-time, flexible, OLDL to allow students to be able to
work full time and study at the same time. Students have the option to take a
maximum period of six years to complete an MSc. For most students the usual
route of study is:

Postgraduate Certificate, 60 credits = one year of study
Postgraduate Diploma, 120 credits = two years of study
MSc, 180 credits = three years of study

Due to the flexibility of the programmes students recruited come from a wide
range of countries across the world and from a wide range of careers.

Programme Directors have responsibility for the recruitment and selection of the
students. Again the College Postgraduate Office is responsible for the initial
stages of screening applications before passing them to appropriate Programme
Directors via EUCLID. Due to the nature of the programmes the majority of
applications were not normally received until later in the session. So far the
Programme Teams were happy with the admissions processes in place and felt
due to the nature of the programmes it was advantageous for students to be able
to apply online.

As both programmes are in their infancy it is unknown whether they would act as
a learning base for students to progress to a PhD – although there has been
some initial interest.

5.3 Student Support

As the Programme Team is in constant contact with students, the panel felt in
many ways the students were given more support than on-campus students. The
Programme Team was always willing to give advice and help to students and
provide plenty of direct feedback on assessments. The biggest problem that
students faced was that they underestimated the number of hours they needed to
commit to studying. The Programme Teams monitor the students closely and are
usually able to pick up through the online discussion forums and assignments
when a student may be beginning to struggle and can offer assistance.

Concerns were raised by the Programme Teams about the adequacy of the
University’s OLDL platform. It was not unknown for the breakdown of WebCT to
last an entire weekend; this issue is being addressed at a central University level.

5.4 Quality Assurance and Enhancement



                                                                        Page 13
The programmes are administered as taught postgraduate programmes under
the University’s Code of Practice for Taught Postgraduate Programmes with
student progression being decided at standard Board of Examiners meetings.
This can be problematic as all University Rules and Regulations and processes
are focused on on-campus student and not OLDL students. The College now has
13 OLDL programmes whose Directors meet on a regular basis to share best
practice in quality related issues. The Postgraduate College team is working with
Academic Affairs and Registry Services to have OLDL programmes included in
Codes of Practice etc.

The panel recommends that the University look at the nature of PPRs for OLDL
students as it was clear normal circumstances did not apply.

The panel commend the dedication, commitment and enthusiasm by the OLDL
Programme Teams and the innovative teaching and learning methods they used
for the programmes.

5.5 Funding

The OLDL Programmes are resourced initially in the first four years by a 20%
funding which was incorporated into the original Business Plans. There seemed
to be little transparency between the University and the School as to where the
monies were being allocated. The Panel raised concerns as to how programmes
would resource themselves after the initial four-year period, and what the
incentives would be to continue the programmes after this period if there were
insufficient student numbers to make the programmes profitable.

The Panel recommends that original Business Plans should be updated by the
School Planning and Resources Committee and the College and formal
agreements agreed to ensure resource allocation is fed back to the programmes
after four years.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1 Summary of Commendations

   •   The review panel commend Professor Sarah Howie and Mr Jim Nisbet on
       the excellent paperwork that had been provided for the review.

   •   The role and remit of the School Postgraduate Committee was
       commended by the panel as clear reporting lines were seen.


   •   The panel commended the hard work that was carried out by Professor
       Sarah Howie to integrate all units across the School.


                                                                     Page 14
  •   The panel commends the dedication and hard work of Pauline McDonald.

  •   The panel commends the work being done by the School to ensure its
      supervisors attended the Supervisor Training event as in some areas
      across the University there was some reluctance to attend.

  •   The Panel commend the provision of social areas for the students in each
      of the IGMM buildings.

  •   Students are to be commended on organising their on away day.

  •   The panel commend the dedication, commitment and enthusiasm by the
      OLDL Programme Teams and the innovative teaching and learning
      methods they used for the programmes.

6.2 Summary of Recommendations

  •   The panel recommends that the College raises the problems with
      Postgraduate Registration with the University, as EUCLID may not be able
      to resolve the problems in the foreseeable future.

  •   The panel recommends that the School consider employing Pauline
      McDonald on a full-time basis.

  •   The Panel recommends that the School explore Pauline McDonald’s
      workload to see if some work could be administered by Academic staff.

  •   The panel recommends that the College should continue its review of the
      MD degree.

  •   The panel recommends that the Postgraduate College Office identify all
      the MD students in the College and pass this information on to the
      relevant Schools.

  •   The panel recommends that the School continue to work closely with the
      College Postgraduate Office to monitor the Research Offers that are made
      to applicants.

  •   It is recommended that where both supervisors are in a relationship, they
      should not be supervising the same student because of possible conflict of
      interests.

  •   It is recommended that the School ensure Supervisors did not take on the
      supervision of too many students at any one time – no more than one new
      student each session is recommended.


                                                                    Page 15
•   It is recommended that the University should work towards greater
    recognition of the contribution of Post-Docs as day-to-day supervisors.

•   It is recommended that in general there is greater recognition of the
    contribution of Post-Docs as supervisors.

•   The panel recommends that the College investigate the possibly of using
    College specific reporting forms for Research Students.

•   The panel recommends that the School explore ways in which it could
    further integrate students from the Royal Edinburgh Hospital.

•   The panel recommends that the College investigate the disparity of
    running costs for different Research Students and further recommends
    that the University provides studentships with comparable stipends and
    running costs.

•   The panel recommends that the University look at the nature of PPRs for
    OLDL students as it was clear normally circumstances did not apply.

•   The Panel recommends that as a priority original Business Plans should
    be updated by the School Planning and Resources Committee and the
    College and formal agreements agreed to ensure resource allocation is
    fed back to the programmes after the four years.




                                                                   Page 16

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:19
posted:11/19/2011
language:English
pages:16