Te Komiti Ako|
Learning and Teaching Committee
NGĀ ĀMIKI/MINUTES
Rā/Date:
Friday, 27 January 2023
Wā/Time:
10.00 am
Wāhi/Venue:
Council Chamber, Level 6 Matariki and via Zoom
Tangata i tae mai | Professor C Moran (Chair), S 9(2)(a) OIA
Present:
S 9(2)(a) OIA
Tangata i tae mai/ S 9(2)(a) OIA
.
In attendance:
Whakapāha/Apologies: S 9(2)(a) OIA
Welcome: The Chair welcomed
S 9(2)(a) OIA to the meeting on behalf ofS 9(2)(a) OIA
and
on b
S 9(2)(a) OIA
ehalf of S 9(2)(a) OIA .
1.
Minutes
The minutes would be circulated to members for approval following the meeting.
2.
Chair’s Report
The Chair welcomed everyone back to a new year. She congratulated S 9(2)(a) OIA from
S 9(2)(a) OIA
Senior Fellowship of S 9(2)(a)
and S 9(2)(a)
from
S 9(2)(a)
and S 9(2)(a) OIA from S 9(2)(a) OIA
for achieving
Fellowship S
. She also noted that at the next meeting in February, space would be set aside to
9(
review and discuss faculty learning and teaching plans and how they map to the new Learning
and Teaching Framework. Members were asked to share their plans with S 9(2)(a) for inclusion
in the next agenda.
3.
Assessment and AI Chatbots: ChatGPT
The Chair noted that ChatGPT and other technologies had existed for some time but had become
more prominent due to media interest in recent months. UC’s position is that we will need to
adapt to the technology as it was virtually impossible to impose a blanket ban on student access
to the tools. She said that the Future Learning team had sent her a suggested three step plan – step
one would be to hold a workshop on 30 January to invite key people from UC to listen to some
expert views on the technology’s impact, they were keen to receive suggested names. Step two
would be an all staff 50-minute presentation which would also be recorded on 7 February to help
raise general awareness and to hold an interactive Q and A session. The final step would be to
hold a repository of resources for staff to consult. S 9(2)(a) OIA
added that the team would
also be working with colleagues at other universities as this was a problem that cut across HE
institutions. The Future Learning Team would also continue to explore whether the use of locked
online browsers might be a possibility to discourage students from using chatbots.
Members exchanged views on ChatGPT which they had all experimented with and suggested that
being familiar with its capabilities was helpful for staff. This is a developing technology and that
currently it was limited to repackaging existing content without the ability to reflect on what is
reproduced or whether it is logically consistent, however that is likely to change as the technology
develops. Students should understand that it is unable to include real world experiences, so the
value of work-integrated learning and other activities would become even more important.
Members suggested several ways ChatGPT might be positively incorporated into teaching
including in a seminar asking it to explain a contested term or concept with students engaging in
debate to reach a collective definition. They felt that staff wanted to see students back on campus
rather than via technology to help support student wellbeing, and that setting a short written
assignment towards the end of a tutorial for immediate submission would alleviate concerns
around the use of ChatGPT and encourage in person attendance. S 9(2)(a) OIA commented that
100-level Management staff were attempting to dispense with large lectures and take more of a
tutorial-based approach to teaching in 2023.
4.
Academic Review Report – BA and related qualifications
S 9(2)(a) OIA took the report as read. He said that the review had been undertaken later than
scheduled due to substantial changes in the BA including the introduction of specialisations.
Overall, the panel had felt confident that the qualifications were meeting the requisite standards.
The report had given useful suggestions for ways to continue to improve. Members commended
the panel and the report.
The following points were discussed:
-
S 9(2)(b)(ii) OIA
S 9(2)(a) OIA
S
Moved by the Chair:
That the academic review report on the BA and associated qualifications be received and
forwarded to the Academic Board and CUAP for approval.
Carried
5.
Academic Review Report – PGCert Strategic Leadership
S 9(2)(a) OIA
was welcomed to the meeting. S noted that the qualification has not been
offered since 2020 and that the intention had been to teach it out and discontinue it, however
colleagues at UC Online had expressed an interest in offering it online. The review report looks
back at how it was being taught in 2020 as an MBA pa thway which was no longer an intended
outcome. If the qualification is to be offered via UC Online, a new programme director would
need to be appointed and there would be exciting opportunities to redesign some of the material.
Members suggested that this context, including previous enrolment data should be clarified prior
to submission to the Academic Board. S 9(2)(a) OIA
was thanked for S report. S left
the meeting.
Moved by the Chair:
That the academic review report on the Postgraduate Certificate in Strategic Leadership be
received and forwarded to the Academic Board and CUAP for approval.
Carried
6.
Erskine Programme Data Comparison Report 2022
S 9(2)(a) OIA
explained that this report was normally discussed by the AAC, but as the
Erskine scheme has such strong ties to teaching and as she would be away for the first AAC
meeting of the year, it made sense to bring the report to this meeting.
2022 had been a challenging year with covid, with international Erskine visits resuming from
July when the borders reopened. There were 26 Erskine and non-Erskine fellows in 2022,
alongside 10 grants which represented about 30% of normal capacity with a pleasing 28% of
normal expenditure. The AAC had commented in 2021 on the lack of diversity in the ethnicity
of visiting fellows and grant recipients and the Erskine programme responded to these comments
with additional data on gender and ethnicity in the 2022 report which would continue to be a
work in progress in future years.
Members discussed the basis of the ethnicity data – some was gathered through visitors self-
identifying their ethnicity, others were based on passport/visa information supplied. A member
suggested that reporting ethnicity to faculties on a quarterly basis would be useful to see how
they are tracking. S 9(2) was thanked for S work on the report.
Moved by the Chair:
That the Erskine programme data comparison r
eport 2022 be received.
Carried
7.
Academic Audit Update – Teaching and
Learning
Members received the draft academic audit self-review responses to the AQA guideline
statements around teaching quality and recognition. S 9(2)(a) OIA
had chaired the
working group which had provided much of the evidence for the review sections and was thanked
for his work. As the evidence had been gathered in late 2021, further updates were being made.
It was confirmed that the recommendations around enhancing the role of student voice with the
UCSA, and Te Akatoki had been retained elsewhere in the report and were now an Enhancement
Initiative.
8.
Graduate Profile Review
A member asked for further information about the reviews underway for the graduate attributes.
S noted that the Pou Whakarae has been reviewing the roles in S portfolio S 9(2)(g)(i)
The remaining reports in Section B were received.
The meeting closed at 11.25 am.
Professor C Moran (Chair)…………………………….. Date……………………….
