After, as reported by the Times online, a secret recording of Fiona Barlow-Brown and Fred Vallee-Tourangeau, both psychology lecturers at Kingston University, urging undergraduates to give Kingston a falsely glowing report in this year’s National Student Survey came to light, Professor Peter Scott, Vice-Chancellor at Kingston University, said: “We believe this to be an isolated incident and regret the inappropriate comments made to students.
Among the statements made by Fiona Barlow -Brown are “Although this is going to sound incredibly biased, if you think something’s a four, my encouragement would be to give it a five. Because that’s what everyone else is doing.”
In a related incident Kingston University Principal Lecturer and MA Music Course Director, Mike Searby sent an email to colleagues after receiving an external examiner's report that seems to be calling the report "unfair and damning". He mentions that "it could hit our recruitment badly". He goes on to say "We must avoid externals with these attitudes in the future". He also mentions "We can not afford this sort of bad publicity". What does this say about the respect that staff at Kingston University have for the QAA process?
Why would lecturers at Kingston University choose to try to convince students to write falsely glowing reports instead of simply relying on the student's true opinions?
Why would Mike Searby want to suppress an external examiner's report rather than simply making the suggested changes and improving quality.
To read the actual document and decide for yourself go to http://www.sirpeterscott.com/mikesearby.html
Why are all of the lecturers still employed by the University. Could it be that the VC encourages this?
|
It is NOT ok to contact this poster with commercial interests.
31 hits
|
