X hits on this document





7 / 17

group work would increase at Levels 2 and 3 as the complexity of the curriculum increased. Students would be required to undertake presentations, group research and group critiques which were considered to be important skills that would develop as the curriculum progressed. The Proposal Team further informed the Panel that the vast majority of the academic staff at LCA Mauritius were experienced in delivering degree courses at the University of Mauritius and other local HE providers and were therefore familiar with the development of students as independent learners and the differences between teaching and learning approaches at particular levels of study. The Panel was reassured by the level of experience demonstrated by the academic staff and their appreciation of the learning and teaching approaches of undergraduate degree courses.

4.7It was noted by the Panel that the case study cited in the proposal documentation for the module BB33099S Undergraduate Major Project (Integrated Case Study) was based on Ryanair. The Panel was therefore interested to learn whether different topics would be chosen for LCA London and LCA Mauritius for future deliveries of the module. The Proposal Team responded that consideration had already been given to the possibility of using Air Mauritius as a case study. Different business cases would be used for each delivery and would require students to apply ‘real world’ theory and practice. The exam questions were not considered by the Proposal Team to be UK-centric and would therefore be applicable both in London and Mauritius. The ‘buddy’ system between LCA London and LCA Mauritius staff would assist in the choice of topic for the module. The Panel, however, considered it important that the business case chosen should introduce students to real world examples that were relevant to them. The Panel felt that Mauritian students would be less able to empathise with a business case such as Ryanair, of which they may have limited knowledge. The Panel therefore agreed to recommend that the Proposal Team ensure that the topic and field of enquiry chosen for the module be appropriately contextualised for delivery to students based in Mauritius [see Recommendation 2.6.2].

4.8In terms of enhancing and ensuring consistency of curriculum delivery the Panel enquired whether a system of peer observation of teaching existed at LCA Mauritius. The Team explained that some academic staff did occasionally observe each others lectures but that it was not a formal process. The fact that the process was not formalised was not considered problematic by the academic staff given their close working relationship and constant discussions on learning and teaching methods and sharing of good practice. The Proposal Team further explained that many of the staff already knew each other before working at LCA Mauritius and that this had assisted in the development of a strong team working ethos in which staff supported one another and met regularly to share experience and good practice. The Panel was satisfied that appropriate mechanisms, though predominantly informal, did exist for staff to discuss and share good practice in learning and teaching and ensure consistency of delivery. It was noted that a condition of Institutional Approval required LCA Mauritius to establish a formal Curriculum Management Committee which would assist in formalising the co-ordination and enhancement of curriculum delivery.




The Panel enquired about the experience of LCA Mauritius staff in the setting of examinations and other forms of assessment. The Proposal Team responded that staff at LCA Mauritius were experienced in setting examinations and assessments for the University of Mauritius and other local HE providers at both undergraduate and postgraduate level and had done so for a number of years. The Panel was reassured that staff were appropriately experienced in setting assessment tasks and agreed to recommend their full involvement in the setting of all items of summative assessment [see Recommendation 2.6.1].

Quality Assurance Division7Confirmed

Document info
Document views58
Page views58
Page last viewedFri Jan 20 12:23:55 UTC 2017