 |
 |
Dear Colleagues, Whilst there are other pressures on us all at the moment, I am sure some of you will have already taken a preliminary look at the HESES Guidance for the 2003 return, and may have noted the changes made to the definition of, and terminology used for, non-completion in Annex D of these notes. In previous years, non-completion has been measured against the final assessment for the year of the programme of study "irrespective of the outcome of that assessment". Thus, provided a student got to the assessment point and undertook it, even if they failed that assessment (examination or whatever) they would be counted as a completion. If, however, they fell 'by the wayside' before the assessment point and therefore did not undertake it, they would be counted as a non-completion. For HESES 2003 there appears to be a change to this, in that the significantly revised wording of Annex D now states that "a student who fails to complete (that is undergo the final assessment of, OR PASS [my caps]) ... is to be returned as a non-completion ...". My interpretation of this is that even if they DO get to the assessment point but subsequently fail the assessment, they will now count as a non-completion. It seems to me that this is the opposite of the previous guidance therefore. Am I reading this correctly, or becoming unduly concerned? You will also note that I have " .... " all reference to 'modules' from the quoted statement above. The change of definition to "Non-completion is defined in terms of modular programmes of study. It applies to all institutions, including those that may not consider their programmes to be modular" is also one that is taxing me at the moment. I find the statement "A student who fails to complete ... any module within the year of programme of study is to be returned as a non-completion for ALL ACTIVITY [my caps] in that year" hard to comprehend. Given that the (current) HEFCE funding model does not fund institutions for 'non-completion' this definition on the face of it appears to suggest that we are now moving to a funding model whereby we will ONLY be funded if the student completes, AND passes, ALL elements of their programme within the year. Such a move seems to run counter to the Widening Participation agenda and the acknowledged difficulties associated with the recruitment of students from 'non-traditional' backgrounds, but could be taken as entirely in step with the Government's agenda to come down hard on poor progression rates! I would welcome comments/enlightenment! Judy -- Judy Evans Head of Management Information London Metropolitan University London North Campus 166-220 Holloway Road London N7 8DB tel: 020 7133 2006 fax: 020 7133 2065 email: [log in to unmask]