NOTES OF A WRAP-UP MEETING HELD ON 31 MAY 2006

Year 1 - BSc/MSci/MEng COMPUTER SCIENCE

Present: GAR (Chair), NJ (Minutes) and students.

1. TUTORIALS

There had been some confusion about the purpose of the tutorial system, as different tutorial groups had had varying experiences of it. GAR agreed that much depended on individual staff methods, but it was also to be hoped that the tutorial system should be driven by students, and the issues they wanted/ needed to raise.

It was reported that at least one tutorial group had not met at all in the second term.

2. FEEDBACK

The students reported that they did not always receive extensive feedback on coursework performance, and would like to know more where they had gone wrong. GAR explained that brevity of feedback is due to time constraints. He also explained that the department deliberately gives coursework a low value in terms of marks, so it can be used rather in a formative sense, to practice and reinforce concepts taught in lectures. If a student struggles with a coursework, therefore, they know they need to put in some more work in that particular area.

3. MID-TERM EXAMS

The students asked if mid-term exams were a possibility. GAR explained that setting exams is a time consuming process, and that there are not the resources to set exams outside the main college exam period. He also gave the opinion that it is good to have the whole two terms to assimilate information. This is particularly true of programming, for example. Some people need more time than others to get to grips with the concepts. Other students agreed that they preferred the opportunity of taking the whole years' units, to see how the course hung together as a whole, as this was more likely to produce an improved exam performance.

4. PROBLEM AND LAB CLASSES

The students thought the term 2 lab and problem classes were very useful. Sometimes, however, the demonstrators would just ‘fix' a problem rather than assist the student in understanding where they had gone wrong. It had been reported that sometimes demonstrators did not turn up to sessions, however, demonstrators had also reported that sometimes lab groups did not turn up.

After discussion of the way labs and problem solving classes are currently set up, it was decided to schedule fewer sessions in the future, but with multiple demonstrators available at each session.

5. PROGRAMMING

GAR asked the students about the programming languages taught. A change of Java for Ruby in the first year programming modules is being considered, as dynamic scripting is now becoming more mainstream.

The students asked about C++, and GAR explained that this language is very difficult to use to teach beginners. Some C programming is covered in the Operating Systems module in the third year.

The students also asked about web programming, as there currently seemed to be a gap in the course in terms of creating web applications. GAR confirmed that there are no specific plans to introduce teaching material in this area. Students are free to work on a final year project in this area, however. He confirmed he would raise this issue. ACTION: GAR to raise 

6. YEAR IN INDUSTRY

The students wanted to know if it was possible to take a year in industry. GAR confirmed that students could take a year out to work, but they would need to apply for an interruption of studies to do so.

Students on the MSci International Programme spend the year in an overseas university in the third year.

Many students also take up opportunities for summer internships.

Nicola Jarvis
June 2006