One way of coping with this is to set up your course in two parts, each
covering a particular academic year. Of course this means that you will
have to progress your students from one part to the other.
(Embedded
image moved [log in to unmask]
to file: 28/07/99 10:23 AM
pic10551.pcx)
Please respond to [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask]
cc: (bcc: Zita Eckett/Registry/Southampton Institute)
Subject: HESA student circ 99/01 - FUNDCOMP field
At Bradford we are working on the guidance on FUNDCOMP (field 155/140) in
this circular. Our particular problem is with research students on
non-standard years of programme.
As we return their FTE to HESA on the pro-rata ( or 50/50 basis) we are
required to make our HESES claim for them retrospectively,so to speak.
This makes them akin to the 0:100 method.
So we now understand from 99/01 that ' the current year of programme of
study as at the 31 July reference date is not the one that the student is
currently doing, but the one recently completed'. We had not previously
grasped this distinction.
It seems to us (and HESA have confirmed this) that in determining whether a
student has completed the year we will have not only to check any entry in
the 'reason for leaving' field - we were geared up to doing this -but to
check the date of leaving in relation to the anniversary of a student's
date of enrolment (COMDATE). If we fail to do this we risk overstating our
failures to complete.
I would be interested in knowing
a)who else uses the '50/50 FTE' method
b)are they finding a similar problem with FUNDCOMP
c) how are they coping with it?
Thanks in anticipation for any response - indeed thank you to anyone who
has read this far.
Fiona Robertson
Planning Division
University of Bradford
BD7 1DP
--------------------
phone - 01274 235080
fax 01274 235740
|