Staff Student Liaison Committee - Meeting Notes

Notes from School of Civil Engineering Student Staff Liaison Committee Meeting Monday 6 September 2010 1 pm

Present

Students
?

Staff Representatives

David Airey
Fernando Alonso-Marroquin
Steve Cochard
Abbas El-Zein (chair)
Li Liu
Gwaenelle Proust
Tim Wilkinson


1. Welcome: AE welcomed all members.

2. Matters arising from last meeting in April

Previous minutes
Any relevant items brought up under separate agenda items

Topics Raised

Professional Engineering: concerning the EWB project-lack of tutorial support and lack of clarity about requirements. Action: to convey to coordinator of Professional Engineering. Action: to convey concerns to Professional Engineering coordinator.

Printing in Link Bldg Computer Lab: Possibility of setting up printing system in Link Bldg lab using cash cards rather than student cards, for convenience. Response: University is aiming for one system but little can be done on this for a single lab.

Thesis Software: Around thesis deadlines, software problems are encountered in Hawkins lab for numerically-intensive theses (low memory available, firewalls preventing downloads etc.); not a highly significant problem but worth mentioning. Response: thesis advisor and student should discuss computational requirements beforehand and adjust the thesis according to resources; student should make sure advisor is informed of problems.

Large Classes: TW asked students about their experience of large classes and scheduling lectures away from Engineering. Response: some problems with getting from one lecture to another; large student numbers in a lecture is no problem per se provided the lecturer is accessible.

Lecture to 3rd year students in preparation for 4th year:Reminder by student to staff. Note taken.

Tutorials in Soil Mechanics Lab: Possibility raised by student of having a choice in tutorials. Response: David??

Minimum Requirements Document: AE raised an interest by the Education committee to draft a minimum requirements or code of practice for lecturers and students. The document would set out principles and would NOT be prescriptive. The idea is to keep a minimum standard and was partly triggered by an anonymous objecting to the way one UoS was run. Response: students did not see the need for such a document. The feeling is that standards are already well maintained and there is a danger with a document of this kind of constraining lecturers.

Use of Programmable Calculators in Exams: Issue raised about inconsistencies in allowing programmable calculators in exams in different UoS. Response: Issues will be tabled in next staff meeting.