Minutes of Teaching Committee Meeting - 8 September 2000

1. Matters arising from the minutes of the last meeting:
   • Construction of School TSP web page.
     Tim Lambert tabled a draft policy. Following discussion, Tim was going to arrange for the draft policy, suitably modified, to appear on the School web pages.
   • Report of Potter committee.
     After discussion, it was agreed that the COMP1021 course description would be modified in the Handbook entry so as to avoid any commitment to object-oriented programming or Java. The committee would elaborate aspects of its proposal and present it to a School meeting after the mid-session break.

2. COMP9022 in second sessions. We are currently feeling the displeasure of PG students who have been forced to enrol in COMP2021 in second session because COMP9022 is currently only run in first session. Should we reconsider on this? Should all/popular/core PG courses have repeat lectures so that they are available day and evening? Particularly UG/PG pairs like COMP3231/9201, COMP3131/9102, COMP3111/9008, COMP3121/9101 (using second session examples)? John Shepherd will introduce the discussion.
   Item deferred.

3. Weighted average formula for use in determining grade of honours in SE and CE. The current formula is complex - particularly for double degree students, and especially BE/MBiomedE - can we simplify it?
   Following discussion, Steve Matheson and Cassandra Nock will design and implement a simplified algorithm.

4. BE(Computer Eng)/MCom proposal - details are here.
   Approved. Goes to Fac. Ed. Ctee as soon as possible.

5. Future of COMP1091: This course was taught for the first time in first session this year. Should it be taught in both sessions next year? What is it's future and how does it fit in with other courses that we offer?
   To be offered in first session next year. The further future of COMP1091 will be discussed in connection with the actions to be taken in relation to the Potter committee recommendations on the use of C in COMP1021.

6. What courses will be offered in which sessions in 2001. (So far, the TC has decided on COMP1021 and COMP3421/9415 in 01x1.) This year's courses are shown at: 2000 session 1 allocation and 2000 session 2 allocation.

   Draft course offerings in 2001 approved by TC.
   After discussion, a list was provided to Rita Bautarua. Rita will be mailing staff responsible for courses where there was some question as to whether they would run.

   A related issue is teaching allocation for 2001, particularly for first and second year courses. Andrew Taylor's notes.

   Course	LIC Session 1	LIC Session 2	LIC Summer
   COMP1001	Papagelis	Papagelis	not offered
   COMP1011	?	Chakravarty	not offered
   COMP1711	Buckland	not offered	not offered
   COMP1021	?	?	?
   COMP1721	not offered	Taylor	not offered
   COMP1091	Engelhardt	?	not offered
   COMP2011	?	?	not offered
   COMP2021	Diessel	Diessel	not offered
   COMP2041	Shepherd	not offered	not offered

   Recommendations have been sent to the HoS for comment.

7. The Database Cluster has produced a proposal for course revision and some proposed constraints on teaching allocation. See DB Proposal Details.
   Following discussion, the Database cluster members were encouraged to bring a more detailed proposal to the next TC meeting, explaining in particular the relationship between COMP2311 and INFS's Business Data Modelling.

8. ELEC have, in JAS's words "bitten the bullet on 4th year Thesis vs Project and introduced a new Project subject for students with low averages (specifically, less than 65%)." This is somewhat consistent with the practice in the Advanced Science program and of course in Computer Science of only letting students with 65+ averages do honours. Do we want to review our policy on this?

   Item deferred.

9. Quality assurance measures for teaching. Should we be having an extra person (perhaps a program coordinator or director of first year studies) acting in a specific quality assurance role for each course we offer?

   Item deferred.

10. In connection with the discussion on same-gender tuts in COMP 1A, Sowmya raises two issues for discussion by the TC:
    • "Directions regarding policy making versus implementation in various matters. In the tutorials case, it was not clear who had sanctioned the policy of same-gender tuts. The implementation and policy making seemed to have been conflated. We need to clarify this.
    • "Indirectly, this raises the issue of what is legitimate use of student (and other) data that is given to us by the university. We have always had access to students' personal details, including gender, but not used it in our teaching/research before this, by my knowledge. Some data collected by the university may be considered `for statistical purposes' only. Is that so in this case or not? If the personal data could be put to other uses, then should we not state that upfront at first year enrolment time?"
    
    After discussion, it was agreed that single gender tutorials for female students would be optional if they were used at all. The issue of whether all or some courses should provide this option was deferred until the results of relevant student survey questions are available."

School of Computer Science & Engineering
The University of New South Wales
Sydney 2052, AUSTRALIA
Phone:  +61 2 9385 6876
Fax:    +61 2 9385 4071