University College London 
Department of Computer Science

Staff-Student Consultative Committee

Minutes of the meeting held on November 15th 2001.

Student Representatives Present:Yogen Manree (MSci CSEE1), Jay Badiyani (MSci CS/EE1), Susannah Moat (MSci CS2), Greg Paperin (MSci CS2)), Mark Delacour (CS3), Michael Kashi (MSciCS4), Jason Jia (CS/EE2), Axel Baner and Clare Gryce (MScCS), David Tamman and Lisa Pretorius (MSc IT), Jagdish Krishan (MSc DCNDS), Tim Rudge (MRes), Adam Pitera (MSc IS), Angel Sastre (MSc VIVE), Matt Trotter (graduate research student), Chris Walker (Union Council).

Staff Representatives Present: Julie Burke (Undergraduate Administrator), Professor Bernard Buxton (Programme Director, MRes CVIPGS), JJ Giwa (Departmental Officer), Dr Steve Hailes (Programme Director, MSc DCNDS), Dr Robin Hirsch (Chair, and Departmental Undergraduate Tutor), Dr Sean Holden (Programme Director, MSc IS), Dr Graham Roberts, Dr Peter Rounce (Programme Director, MSc IT), Jill Saunders (minutes, Departmental Administrator), Barry Stein (Technical Support Group), Denis Timm (Technical Support Group), John Washbrook (Director of Studies), Professor Steve Wilbur (Head of Department).
 

1.Apologies for absence.

Dr Graham Knight (Admissions Tutor)

2.Notice of Any Other Business

Timings of elections of student representatives;

Printing quotas;

Bulk buying of recommended course textbooks;

Facility for drinks in Pearson Building.

3.Constitution of SSCC

The Chair welcomed new and returning members to the committee.It was AGREED to amend the committee's constitution to include MSc IS and UCL Union Council representatives.

4.Approval of minutes of the meeting of February 28th 2001

These were APPROVED.

5.Matters arising from the last meeting

5.12^nd year lab smells.Mark Delacour and JJ Giwa had monitored the situation and reported that there was no longer a problem.

5.2Student lockers. JJ Giwa reported that a further 20 lockers were to be installed. However, allocation of the original set had still not been decided.The Chair asked the reps to consult together about allocation and notify JJ accordingly.ACTION: Student reps to agree on allocation process.

6.End of year wrap-up sessions, matters arising

There were no matters raised arising from the end of year wrap-up sessions held after last year's examinations.

7.Web-based feed-back forms

Jill Saunders reported that each year the Departmentseeks student comments on the CS courses they take. This year the Department will be switching from a paper-based exercise to forms submitted on-line.We hope this will speed up the process and make it more effective.Students' comments on how the arrangements work will be welcomed.

8.Widening participation at UCL. Our Faculty has £20,000 for schemes to encourage wider participation. The Department's acting Admissions Tutor (Graham Knight) would welcome ideas. One suggestion has been to ask students from state schools/colleges to go back to talk to younger pupils. Chris Walker suggested that we could arrange for 6^th formers to undertake some joint project work involving the department.Tim Rudge suggested that we organise open days for pupils before they have to start applying through UCAS. ACTION: Chair to forward these ideas to Graham Knight.

9.MSc VIVE

9.1Timetable: too many 9am starts. Also, some timetable clashes (e.g. z05) [Angel Sastre Ramos].ACTION: Jill Saunders/Sarah Berke to look into the clash situation. Unfortunately, 9am starts could not be avoided.

Greg Paperin also informed the Committee of problems with options clashes in the undergraduate timetables.John Washbrook pointed out that timetables had to be constructed at an early stage during the summer. Considerable effort had gone into trying to obtain information from returning students, to see what options were being chosen and thus plan the timetable. However, the response had not been very good. So inevitably we had not been able to cater for everyone's needs. Returning students should take note of this for the future.

10.MSc CS

10.1Receiving mail in the department, particularly for non-local students [Clare Gryce]. JJ pointed out that organising student post has always been problematic as there is always such a large amount that remains uncollected; therefore extending this practice seems unadvisable. JJ suggested that students with any particular problems should come to see her to discuss what can be arranged.ACTION: Claire Gryce to advise students to see JJ Giwa.

10.2Rescheduling of cancelled lectures [Clare Gryce]. In response to the points raised, it was explained that lecturers would normally plan for some slack built into a lecture schedule to cover for any unavoidable absences.However, where cancelled lectures are rescheduled, it might not always be possible to take into account students' other commitments.Steve Wilbur recommended that if the MSc CS students were still concerned over the frequency of lecture cancellations they should email the Programme Director.

10.3Lack of basic equipment in some lectures (e.g. whiteboard, pen and chalk) has been a problem
for some lectures [Clare Gryce].John Washbrook replied that he would remind all teaching staff of their responsibility for ensuring they have the right materials.ACTION: John Washbrook, and all teaching staff.There had also been some problems with AV equipment in the lecture rooms, to the extent that some lectures had to be cancelled.Graham Roberts reminded those present that staff can phone the College AV service, and that help is often prompt.

10.4Guide for new students about the facilities available in both the university and the computer science department. This could include things like the nearest coffee shop, can machine, where common rooms, shops and refectories are. Within the Computer Science department, information regarding use of cd writers, scanners and digital cameras would also be useful. I think
this would be a great help, especially to the MScCS students, who have not had
tours or been at the university previously [Paul Whitehouse].John Washbrook agreed that this was a good idea and encouraged the students to take ownership of this project. Paul was asked to oversee the process, and all other representatives were urged to send in contributions.ACTION: Paul Whitehouse, and all student reps.

11.MRes

11.1Insufficient workstations and software licences [Tim Rudge]. Tim explained in more detail the problems with 22 MSc VIVE and MRes students sharing 8 SGI machines, the small number of digital cameras currently working, and the small number of IDL software licences. Denis Timm noted that there should now be 5 working digital cameras. Bernard Buxton reported that IDL would be replaced with Matlab next year.SRW explained that the ratio of equipment to students is consistent with our planning:3 students per facility is the maximum that we can usually plan for. Elsewhere in College it is usually less favourable.In response to a request for extensions to coursework deadlines, Bernard replied that this would have to be negotiated separately with the Programme Director.

12.Undergraduate

12.1When will exams finish? [Jason Jia].The 2002 undergraduate exams period is 29 April – 24 May. (Secretary’s note: the postgraduate exams period extends until 7 June).

12.2Too dark in the second year lab [Jason Jia].It was noted that this might be partly due to the overall lighting levels, and partly due to broken lights. Everyone was reminded that any building faults should be emailed to building-faults@cs.ucl.ac.ukJJ was asked to liaise with Estates about the overall lighting conditions. It was noted, however, that this could take some time for Estates to rectify.ACTION: JJ to contact Estates.

12.3How much are the second year exams worth? [Jason Jia[. The Chair advised students to see the full details on the teaching web pages athttp://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/teaching/ug/assess.htm#DEGREE

12.4First year 1B10 Computer Architecture practicals are insufficient - only half an hour, with 2 demonstrators, for groups of 22 students [Jay Badiyani]. Graham Roberts reminded the Committee that the allocation of demonstrators depends both on the resources we have to pay them, and the availability of research students to do this work.There then followed a discussion about undergraduates doing demonstrating work, and the benefits of this. However, there was still a payment issue to be resolved.It was understood that in a number of other departments, students were doing this sort of work without payment.ACTION: Jill Saunders/Graham Roberts to investigate further with College about payment.ACTION: Student reps to consult with their fellow students about whether they really would have the time to commit to demonstrating work.

12.5Timing of Professional Issues day [Susanah Moat & Greg Paperin]
The penultimate day of term is not good, given the number of coursework deadlines around then. It should be earlier in the term, and separate from the normal lecture schedule.The Committee rejected the idea of a date in Reading Week, and proposed instead the option of two Wednesday pm sessions. ACTION: to be raised in the Departmental Teaching Committee.

12.6Need for a system that allows lecturers to know when other courses have coursework
deadlines [Susanah Moat & Greg Paperin].It was noted that JJ already has a planning system, which all teaching staff are repeatedly asked to consult.JJ was asked to look into organising a web-based system that people might find more accessible. ACTION: JJ Giwa.

12.7Model answers for past exam questions [Susanah Moat & Greg Paperin].This has been raised in the SSCC previously and the answer has always been ‘no.’ The Chair thought that College policy prevented this.

12.8Explanation of the scheme used to decide which programs count as program options. Also, are
3rd year options available to 2nd year students if they have the pre-requisites? [Susanah Moat & Greg Paperin]. It was proposed that the department’s programme rules needed to be clarified. For example if Cognitive Science and Electrical Engineering courses are classed as programme options, why not also Maths courses?ACTION: Teaching Committee to review options. On the second point, regarding taking 3^rd year courses in Year 2, Robin Hirsch pointed out that this was usually unadvisable because of timetabling constraints, and also because it reduced that student’s choice in year 3. However, if a student came to him with a well-thought out plan, he would consider approving such requests.

13.Any other business

New items of AOB raised at this stage were not permitted (suggestion that the SSCC should meet more frequently, and night-time access to student labs).

13.1Timings of elections of student representatives.It was AGREED that more time was needed between the nominations closing date and the date of the first meeting.

13.2Printing quotas. Students were advised to use ISD printing facilities.

13.3Bulk buying of recommended course textbooks. The Chair proposed that this was an ideal project for the Students Union or the Pearson Society to organise.

13.4Facility for drinks in Pearson Building. The can machine in the basement has been removed. JJ has been trying everything possible to get a replacement but has so far been thwarted by the drinks companies and by College.It might be possible to get a hot drinks machine installed in the Student Common Room. ACTION: JJ to keep student reps informed of any progress.

14.Date of next meeting

To be arranged (February 2002).