1. Welcome to YTEP

Welcome to your studies on one of YTEP’s theological education programmes.

The Yorkshire Theological Education Partnership is the co-ordinating body for Common Awards within the Yorkshire region.  It is one of the 18 recognised Theological Education Institutions (TEIs) across England, Wales and Scotland whose Common Awards programmes are validated by Durham University and as such it is the channel of communication between local Centres in Yorkshire and the University.

YTEP was formed as a registered charity by the diocesan and other Church-related theological training providers who had worked together across Yorkshire for some years.  With the introduction of Common Awards in 2014 they formed a consortium to enable them to continue training ordinands, lay ministers and independent students across the region.

The partnership consists of the following Centres:

·         Church Army  (based in Sheffield)  [CA]

·         The College of the Resurrection  (Mirfield)  [CoR] ­

·         St Hild College  (Mirfield, Sheffield and Online)  [St Hild]

·         Leeds Diocesan School of Ministry  (with local venues at Bingley and Mirfield)  [LSoM]

·         York Diocesan School of Ministry  (with local venues in York, Middlesbrough and Beverley)  [YSoM]

This handbook provides you with general information (about policies and procedures, etc) which is common across the whole of YTEP.  Your Centre may provide additional information which is specific to the way the courses are offered in your location.

The day-to-day management of YTEP currently falls to...

Dr Gary Wilton (Head of Initial Training, Church Army), Chair of the Management Committee,

Mr Martine Somerville, Academic Co-ordinator (due to retire at the end of 2022)  and

Mrs Lynne Gordon-Taylor, Administrative Officer.

We all work part-time for YTEP, based in an office alongside the College of the Resurrection in Mirfield.  You can contact us via email or telephone with any questions, queries or comments.  We provide advice and guidance to both students and staff, although you’ll find that most of your questions can be answered by staff or module tutors in your Centre.

Similarly, most communications about your course will come from your Programme Leader but for a few matters we or Durham University might contact you directly.

We hope that your Common Awards studies are both enjoyable and successful.

Our contact details are:

Email:  ytep@mirfield.org.uk

Tel:      07762 102656

2. Starting as a student

2.1    Admission

The fact that you are reading this handbook normally means that you’ve already been accepted onto a course but if you’d like to find out more about our application, selection and admissions processes, entry qualifications or how to claim Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL), also known as Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL), please see YTEP’s Admissions Policy, a summary of which is provided in Appendix A.

2.2    Registration and student records

Centres collect initial information about you from your application form.  They may then supplement this with further details requested when you enrol on your programme.  At this stage your Centre sets you up with access to Moodle (see section 2.4 below).

There are three IT systems in which your details are then recorded and stored during your lifetime as a YTEP student:

(a)       Your Centre’s local student record system;

(b)       YTEP Moodle – this is used primarily to support the delivery of your modules and register you on them with Durham University, and ultimately to process your assessments, their results and your award outcomes.

(c)       Durham University’s Banner student record system – this is populated with a limited amount of personal data plus details of your programme (eg. your module selections and results), extracted out of Moodle.

Once you have enrolled at your Centre your basic data are used to populate Durham’s programme registration records.  This is done in October if you start in September and in February for January starters.  Durham then generates your student Banner ID number, which will be communicated to you via your Centre.  Data about the modules you take are passed to Durham in November/February each year, ready for the overarching Common Awards Board of Examiners in Durham to process your marks in the summer/autumn.

Unless you indicate to the contrary when you enrol, we assume that you are happy for your email address to be passed on to Durham University.  The University does not generally communicate direct with Common Awards students and plans to use your email address only to invite you to take part in an annual student survey.

2.3    Student ID cards

Each YTEP student, once their Banner ID number has been issued, has the option to submit a portrait photo to obtain a Durham ‘campus’ card, which facilitates access to other universities’ libraries (through ‘SCONUL Access’).  This is valid for the whole length of your programme.  There is no charge for this card unless you need to have an original one replaced.

Following a hiatus during the COVID-19 pandemic, Durham has reintroduced the issuing of campus cards to Common Awards students.  All queries about campus cards should be sent by email to ytep@mirfield.org.uk.

You may wish to apply for an NUS TOTUM card instead of, or in addition to, a Durham campus card, since that is likely to secure a wider range of discounts and benefits.  If you do want an NUS card, you should email YTEP with your full name, date of birth, YTEP Centre name and Durham student ID number to request a personal URL from Durham to use to apply online.  When it then comes to selecting your place of study you should select Durham Students’ Union from the drop-down menu.  You will have to pay for the NUS card, however you will be able to apply for one straightaway whereas you will have to wait until the student records creation process is complete to receive a Durham campus card (in either December or March).

2.4    YTEP Moodle

YTEP uses Moodle not only as a virtual learning environment (VLE) for all its students but also as a general website and as a student records system.

VLE: the core element of Moodle is the module information that it holds – handbooks, teaching schedules, lecture handouts, assessment details, etc.  Your Centre will set you up with access to the sections for the modules that you study each year and you will submit your written assessments via ‘Turnitin’, accessed through the Moodle module pages.

General website: the definitive versions of YTEP’s policies and procedures, programme documentation and other reference information are available to all students and staff.

Student records: the data about you held in Moodle is used to generate reports used by Centres, YTEP and Durham University, including your assessment results and any APL credits.

2.5    Information about your programme

For each module you study you will be able to access a Module Handbook.  This will normally be online and downloadable from Moodle, or a hard copy will be provided by your module tutor.  Each Centre and hub operates its own timetable and the detailed content of teaching sessions for the same module may vary from Centre to Centre and from hub to hub.

3. Undertaking your studies

3.1    Planning

Your module tutors will provide you with advice and suggestions to enable you to get the most out of your studies.  Centres offer study skill sessions and support for groups and individuals.  All tutors will be very happy to offer guidance.  Always plan your timetable of work well in advance.  This is particularly important if you are studying part-time and need to work around other commitments which vary in their intensity and demands on your time.

3.2    Learning resources

Allow plenty of time for researching and preparing each piece of coursework.  Library resources will be in greatest demand the closer the deadline approaches.  Do not wait until the last minute and then find that all the books are out!  If something has been checked out by a fellow student, place a reservation request for it with the Centre librarian.

You should not just rely on the booklist for the assignments.  Look around for relevant source materials by browsing along the library shelves and on appropriate websites.  However, when using web resources evaluate them carefully to ensure they really do meet your needs and assist in responding appropriately to the task in hand (eg. are ‘academic’ rather than ‘popular’).

Do make good use of the free journals and online books from SCM, Canterbury Press, SPCK, IVP, Cambridge University Press and VLeBooks, which are available on the Hub: Hub Resources section of the YTEP Moodle site.  Keep an eye out for new e-book titles being added though the year.

3.3    Referencing

Get into the habit of recording the bibliographical details and page numbers next to any notes you make from books, etc.  Make a note of all the references you use.  This will save you valuable time later, particularly as you may find that you cannot trace an item you have used if you have not made a careful note of the bibliographical details.  You will gain marks for good organisation and referencing of material in your assignments.  (See also sections 4.5 and 4.6 on Referencing under Assessment.)

3.4    Placements

If you are training for a licensed ministry, a placement in some form or other will be an integral element of your programme.   YTEP’s Placement Policy in Appendix B explains the purposes of placements and sets out minimum requirements of Centres in terms of their design and oversight, and student support and assessment.

3.5    Research and dissertations

If you undertake a dissertation or independent learning project as part of your programme you will need to get your proposed research project approved in advance, to ensure that you satisfy YTEP’s ethical guidelines, including compliance with safeguarding procedures.  Failure to do so could lead you to fail the module and even disciplinary action.  Your module tutor will guide you through the prescribed process, including the submission of a proposal form to YTEP’s Student Affairs Sub-Committee (SASC).  The full YTEP Research Ethics Policy and Guidance and the associated forms are set out in Appendix C.

4. Assessment

4.1    Planning assignments

It is important that you plan your assignment – both the time needed to produce it and its contents.   Make a list of the points that you want to discuss and make sure that you have an introduction and a conclusion.

In written assignments ask yourself:

• Do the sections of the piece of work fit neatly together?
• Is there a consistent theme or line of argument in the various points made?
• Is what you are saying relevant to the question?
• Is your work ‘balanced’?  (You will be given credit for discussing alternative views / interpretations rather than simply espousing a single perspective throughout.  However, make clear what your own conclusions are on the basis of the evidence presented throughout the essay.)

You may find it helpful to look at the general assessment criteria for Common Awards, so that you are clear about the ‘target’ you are aiming at.  These are accessible in the Assessment Types – Guidance and Marking Criteria section of the Durham University Common Awards website.

Some guidelines now follow which, if you follow them, will make for a well presented piece of work.

Marks are deducted for poor presentation and incorrect referencing.

If you have specific learning difficulties or any other disability please discuss your needs with your tutor at the earliest opportunity – do not wait until your assignment deadline is looming!

4.2    Formatting assignments

There is no one single way to present work but there are some inappropriate ways. Presentation of your work is important.  It enables the reader to see your structure clearly and it encourages you to think carefully about the points you wish to make.

The cover-sheet must include:

• Your name
• Your Banner ID number
• The module number and title
• Your Centre (and Hub)
• Your tutor’s name
• The assignment number (eg. 1 or 2) and type (eg. Written theological reflection)
• The title of the assignment  (NOTE: Don’t repeat this at the start of your assignment – duplication will mean you use up words unnecessarily.)
• The total word-count.

Your assessed work should normally be uploaded to Turnitin (accessed via Moodle) as a Microsoft Word file, in a font size not less than 11, double-line-spaced, with one extra space between paragraphs and approximately 2.5 cm of margin on all sides.  The assignment should be page-numbered, with no number on the title page.  If you use footnotes they should be single-line-spaced and placed at the bottom of each page.  The bibliography should be single-line-spaced and placed at the end of the piece.

4.3    Appendices

Appendices should only be included where absolutely necessary and should certainly not be used as an alternative location for demonstrating learning outcomes, as the main body of the work should be able to stand alone.

4.4    Inclusive language

It is important to use inclusive language in your written assignments: this means that you should not use words implying one gender when both genders are meant.  So it would be inappropriate to write, “Each student should hand in his essay by the due date”, since it suggests to many people that only males are required to comply.  As an alternative to repeating “he” or she” and “his or her” many times throughout an essay, plurals are often the easiest way of including both genders.  Thus it is better to write, “Readers find themselves asking …” rather than “The reader finds himself or herself asking ….” Although the use of “their” with a single subject is sometimes considered grammatically incorrect, this form has gained increased acceptance (as in “Each student should collect their essay.”)

4.5    Academic referencing

There are two separate documents which provide detailed instructions and guidance on the two different referencing systems used within YTEP:

Harvard (used by Church Army and the diocesan Schools of Ministry):  Referencing Guide (including details about electronic material such as eBooks) accessible on the YTEP Moodle site.

MHRA (used by St Hild College and the College of the Resurrection):  Common Awards Academic Conventions accessible on the Durham University Common Awards website.

Your Centre and Programme Leader will provide you with clear advice about which system to use.  It is most important to be consistent in your use of the referencing system to ensure that your tutors can give you credit for the research you have done in finding and referencing appropriate resources.

4.6    Referencing Biblical texts

You should refer to biblical texts by chapter and verse.  The correct form is to put a colon between chapter number and verse number, e.g. John 3:16; Acts 4:11-14.

Write the name of the biblical book in full when you are referring to (i) the book itself, (ii) to one or more entire chapters, or (iii) at the beginning of a sentence.  Here are examples of each of those instances: (i) “....is a key theme of the book of Genesis”, (ii) “as narrated in 1 Samuel 16-18”, or (iii) “Romans 1:17 is a much-disputed verse...”

When you are referring to a verse or several verses you should abbreviate the biblical book name.  A list of abbreviations to be used appears below.

Do not use the abbreviation f. or ff. to refer to verses, e.g. Gen. 11:1ff.  Instead, give the specific verses that are relevant: Gen. 1:1-3.  This avoids any potential confusion by giving exact information.

Within a sentence, you can refer to a text in two ways: (i) “Jacob’s status as a scoundrel is shown in Gen. 32:7-8…” or (ii) you can put the citation in brackets, with any punctuation after the citation: “Jacob was clearly a scoundrel (Gen. 32:7-8)…”

When you quote a text verbatim (ie. exactly, word-for-word), put the reference in brackets after the closing quotation mark.  Thus: “Prepare to meet your God, O Israel” (Amos 4:12).

The following is a list of standard abbreviations of biblical book names.  Note that if the last letter of the abbreviation is the same as the last letter of the book name there is no full-stop, e.g. Ruth and 1 Kgs.

4.7    All your own work?

We expect all students on Common Awards programmes to have a professional and honest approach to their work.  Unfortunately there are occasional instances of academic misconduct such as plagiarism (often inadvertent), submitting work which has previously been submitted for another course and collusion with others.

Plagiarism is defined as the unacknowledged use including quotation and close paraphrasing of other people's writing and ideas, amounting to the presentation of the other person's writings or thoughts as one's own.  This includes using material which is available on the worldwide web and in any other electronic form, and “contract cheating”, i.e. obtaining an essay from an essay-writing website or equivalent source and submitting it for marking as if it were your own work.

All YTEP students are required to submit assignments via ‘Turnitin’, which supports the detection of plagiarism and other academic misconduct by assessing similarity with work previously submitted to its international database.  Such similarity points to a potential problem but does not automatically equate to any intention to cheat, however. Tutors understand that in the early days of students’ study there is occasionally the tendency to use sources without acknowledging them at all or referencing them properly.  

If this occurs when a student submits a formative assignment, then the tutor will discuss the situation with the student in order to improve their academic writing and no further action will be taken.  However, if this occurs in the submission of a summative piece of work, even if it is the student’s first such submission, then the alleged misconduct will need to be dealt with by an academic misconduct panel.  The procedure for this is set out in the Common Awards Academic Misconduct Policy.

At the beginning of each academic year you will be required to complete a Student Academic Integrity Declaration that all your work will be your own (Appendix D).  You should complete it, sign it and submit it to your tutor.  This may happen at an induction event at your Centre.

4.8    Word-counts

You will be given a word-limit for every assignment that you submit.  Do remember that you are being tested not simply on your ability to write an essay on a particular topic, a report on a placement, a critical reflection or whatever, but also on your ability to do so within a set number of words.  Word-limits can be seen as analogous to time-limits in examinations.  Learning to make the most of word-limits is part of the skills element of the academic programme and removing unnecessary words generally improves the quality of the writing.

Module handbooks include details of the word-limit for each individual piece of assessed work.  This is a limit, not a target, so there are no penalties for not exceeding it.  However if your piece of work is too short you may not have covered all the points which you are expected to and this may be reflected in the mark you are awarded.  Therefore, too few words may result in a self-imposed penalty.

As required by Durham University, YTEP has a formal Policy on Over-length Work (Appendix E) but the following paragraphs give you an important summary and helpful guidance.

You must declare an exact word-count when submitting written assessments.

The assessment word-limit includes all the main text (including any tables of data), any assignment title, abstract, footnotes (excluding those used simply for the purpose of referencing and citation) and any in-text citations.  The assessment word-limit excludes the text on any cover-sheet (including any description of the assignment task or question), student declaration, document header, bibliography, appendices, graphs and images.

Normally documents will be produced using Microsoft Word or similar software and the word-count indicated by such software will be used for calculations.

If it happens that you have fewer than 100 words in excess of the word limit a penalty will not be imposed.  Beyond that point you will be penalised for the all the additional words (i.e. 100+).  If in doubt check out the formal policy.

4.9    Submitting your work

Your Centre is responsible for providing you with instructions about submitting your work via Turnitin.  Your tutors will ensure you have all the necessary details, including deadline dates.  This information is normally included in module handbooks, available on Moodle.  It is vital that you make a secure back-up copy of any assignment that you submit.  YTEP and your Centre cannot be held responsible for any difficulty with Turnitin or Moodle that means that a submission is lost within the system.

4.10  Meeting deadlines and seeking extensions

Your module tutor will ensure that dates for submission of assessed work are clearly communicated at the beginning of the module.  If you think you are not going to be able to meet the deadline then it may be possible to be granted an extension.

Please see YTEP’s Extensions and Late Submissions Policy (Appendix F) and Extension Request Form (Appendix G).

Durham University has the following strict rules about meeting deadlines, therefore it is important that you seek an extension when there are genuine causes of delay.

If a student who has not been granted an extension fails to submit a piece of summative assessed work (including a dissertation) by the published deadline, the following policy and procedure will apply:

(i)    Students who submit their summative assessed work late but within five working days of the deadline shall be penalised by having the mark for that piece of work capped at the module pass mark.  The work will be marked and feedback supplied.  The mark that would have been awarded to the student had the penalty not been applied should be indicated to the student.

(ii)   Summative assessed work submitted more than five working days after the deadline will not be marked and a mark of zero will be recorded.

(iii)  In the unusual event that a TEI has specified different deadlines for electronic and hard copy formats of the same piece of summative assessed work, the penalty in (i) above will apply to the first deadline.

4.11  Serious adverse circumstances

Where in-year assistance or mitigation by your Centre is unable to take full account of your exceptional personal circumstances, Durham’s SACs process may be able to provide some help.  This enables the YTEP Board of Examiners to assess and mitigate the impact of your adverse circumstances on your formal assessments.

Please see Durham University’s SACs Guidance and YTEP’s SACs Procedure (Appendix H) and Form (Appendix I).

4.12  Suspensions and withdrawals

Sometimes students’ personal circumstances are severe enough to necessitate a complete break from their studies.  If an extension for a single assignment is an insufficient solution to your difficulties in keeping up with deadlines or the SACs procedure doesn’t fit your circumstances you should discuss with your Programme Leader the possibility of suspending your studies temporarily or withdrawing from the programme on a permanent basis.

If your request for suspension is supported by your Centre, a formal request then needs to be made in writing to the Chair of the YTEP Management Committee on a Common Awards Concession Request Form.  If you intend to withdraw completely from your programme, you also need to discuss this with your Programme Leader, so that they can formally notify YTEP (and thus Durham University).  It is often possible to be readmitted to a Common Awards programme after initially withdrawing from it, so this can be a preferable option to a suspension, which is not permitted to be of indefinite length.

5. Outcomes of assessment

5.1    Marking and moderation

Your tutors will be using Durham University’s assessment criteria in making professional judgements about your work and arriving at a mark to award for each piece of work.  There are different criteria for different forms of assessment (e.g. written essays, portfolios, oral presentations) and different criteria for each level at which modules are taught and assessed.

There is an internal moderation process for all assessed work which normally involves the sampling of assignments in a certain batch by a second tutor in order to identify anomalous marks which indicate systematic defects in the first-marking process.  Because of their heavy credit-weighting, every dissertation and major project submission is double-marked by two tutors.  The External Examiner (appointed by Durham University) also reviews a selection of assignments and the marks and feedback provided by tutors, with a view to ensuring parity not only within YTEP but across all TEIs delivering Common Awards.

5.2    Results

Tutors may tell you your marks as soon as they have been moderated but any marks which you are given are ALWAYS provisional until they have been presented to and confirmed by the YTEP Board of Examiners (currently chaired by Lynn Comer, Director of York School of Ministry).  This normally meets in July (for autumn and spring term module marks) and October (for summer term results and to make progression decisions) each year.  It is Durham’s Common Awards Board of Examiners, meeting in August/September and November/December, which makes the ultimate decision to grant you an award when you have completed your programme.

A formal summary of your module marks for the previous academic year will be available from your Centre following the meeting of the YTEP Board of Examiners in October (or in July if you have completed all the modules on your programme before June).

5.3    Feedback to students

As well as a mark, you will always receive feedback on the work you have submitted.  Assessment and feedback is an important part of the learning process.  We aim to give you feedback within three weeks of the deadline for submission of the assignment and, in particular, ahead of your next submission deadline.  Individual feedback on work submitted through Turnitin is accessible on Moodle and is normally in writing but may include an audio file.  Tutors may also provide general feedback to the whole student cohort.

If you are unsure about points which have been raised by your tutor in the feedback you receive, then do talk with them and ask them to explain anything that is not clear to you.

5.4    Durham University’s response to COVID-19

There has been concern across the whole of higher education in the UK that students should not be disadvantaged, for whatever reason, by the COVID-19 pandemic.  Durham University responded with its ‘No Detriment Policy’ in 2020 and ‘Academic Safety Net’ in 2021.  The University has not taken any special measures since then but the effects of the measures taken in 2020 and 2021 will continue to be felt until everyone who was a student then has completed their programme (potentially up to 2028!).

5.5    Academic progress

If you as a student don’t engage fully with your programme and therefore fail to make satisfactory progress your Centre will initially make informal attempts to encourage you to re-engage.  If these don’t work, Durham University’s Academic Progress procedure will be implemented.  This may lead to a formal warning in the form of an Academic Progress Notice being issued and, ultimately, if you don’t return to making appropriate academic progress, to you being required to withdraw from your programme.

6. Academic support and feedback from students

6.1    Dealing with problems that arise during your studies

We hope that your studies go smoothly and successfully.  However, from time to time students do encounter problems which may be caused by ill health or other unforeseen personal circumstances such as work pressures.  Your Programme Leaders and we at YTEP are here to help and have a number of ways to mitigate your difficulties at our disposal, including Durham’s ‘concessions’ procedures.

Please do raise any queries with your tutors in the first instance or, if necessary, directly with YTEP staff – sooner rather than later is always best.  All enquiries will be dealt with in strict confidence and if we need to raise your case with Durham University or any other person or organisation we will do so only with your permission.

6.2    Raising queries and concerns

Everyone responsible for the delivery of Common Awards programmes is committed to ensuring that you have a successful outcome for the effort you put into your study.  If you have queries or concerns please raise them with the most appropriate member of staff:

• Your module tutor is the first person to contact about queries concerning the module. They may also be able to provide you with additional information about your studies.
• Your Programme Leader or Director of Studies will be able to answer questions about the programme as a whole or provide additional support and advice.
• Your Head of Centre will be able to deal with broader issues which relate to more than one module, to your programme or to the student cohort as a whole.
• All of the above roles may in practice be filled by the same person within your Centre!
• YTEP staff can answer questions you may have about the relationship with Durham University, general Common Awards regulations or the Partnership as a whole.

Each Centre also has more formal means of listening to your queries and comments, including a system of student representatives for each cohort.  Where you find that you have not received a satisfactory response from one of the people mentioned above or you have questions in common with other students, you should raise your concerns through these channels.  Your Centre will inform you about how to do this (see ‘The student voice’ below).

In the event that you are sufficiently dissatisfied with some aspect of your course that you wish to make a formal complaint, YTEP has a formal Student Complaints Policy and Procedure (Appendix J) approved by Durham University.  You have the right ultimately to take any complaint to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIAHE) but only once you have exhausted all the relevant processes of your Centre, YTEP and/or Durham University.

6.3    Academic appeals

An academic appeal is a request from a student for the formal review of an academic decision affecting that student, most commonly a decision of a Board of Examiners.  YTEP manages any appeals from Common Awards students in line with Durham University’s guidance on its website

6.4    ‘The student voice’

Your views as a student are very important to us.  You will be invited to complete an evaluation questionnaire (MEQ) at the end of each module, either online or in hard copy.  Your Programme Leader or Director of Studies will also have means of receiving and responding to your comments and questions throughout your programme.  Do not hesitate to bring matters to their attention.  Positive comments about what is working well as well as suggestions for changes and improvements are all appreciated.  A survey of student satisfaction for all TEIs is conducted annually by Durham University (‘CASS’ – the Common Awards Student Survey).

Proposed changes to practice or ideas for development frequently come as a result of comments from students.  It doesn’t matter whether such comments come to the attention of decision-makers at Centre, TEI or university level via student representatives, Centre staff or anonymous questionnaires and surveys.  If you have constructive criticism to offer, please do so!

6.5    Student representatives

Each Centre has students from different levels and programmes who act as representatives to the Centre’s leadership and management group(s).  A number of these reps sit on the YTEP Management Committee (see 7.2 below), where they bring a student perspective to that committee’s discussions, having consulted with their peers and submitted written reports in advance (see Appendix L).  Outcomes of interest are then fed back by the reps to their fellow students.  Please see Appendix K for descriptions of the student rep roles.

At the start of AY 2022/23 there is one student rep already nominated to attend CAMC, Steve Grasham from Church Army.  Others will be sought in the autumn term.

7. How YTEP manages Common Awards

7.1    Programmes

8. APPENDICES - YTEP Policies, Procedures and Forms

All the following documents are reviewed on an annual basis.

The latest versions are always available on the YTEP Moodle site.

8.1. Appendix A - Admissions Policy Summary

Overview

1          This document is a summary of the full YTEP Admissions Policy, as at June 2022.  The policy sets out YTEP’s principles for the recruitment and admission of students.  It describes the processes which are used to select and admit students to the undergraduate and postgraduate Common Awards programmes which are offered by YTEP and validated by Durham University.

2          The policy supports the objects of YTEP, namely:

(i)    To advance education for the public benefit in ministerial education [sic], for both ordained and lay members of the Christian churches; and

(ii)   The advancement of theological ministerial education and training for those with a personal interest.

3          The aim is to offer flexible admissions criteria which will provide for the recruitment of students from diverse backgrounds who are able to benefit from their chosen programme and achieve their target award.

4          For some potential students whose goal is to prepare for ministry, either ordained or lay, there will be additional admission requirements (see paragraph 7 below).

Application process

5          Applicants normally need to apply to the local Centre where they will undertake the majority of their programme, using that Centre’s application form.

6          Applicants who will be studying as part of their training for ordained or lay ministry also need to be selected for ministry by a Bishops’ Advisory Panel or other authorised body prior to beginning their study.

7          All applicants will be interviewed by the appropriate Centre tutor(s) in order to determine the most appropriate programme for them prior to any offer of a place being made.

8          Centres will provide relevant details of applicants admitted to specific programmes to YTEP for checking that they meet the eligibility criteria and formal confirmation of their programme registrations.

9          Admissions decisions will be communicated to individual applicants by their Centres within fifteen working days of being made.

Entry requirements

Background

10        The standard programme entry requirements are those set out in the current summary of Common Awards Entry Requirements and the Typical Admissions Requirements included in the Programme Specification for each award.  The intention is to be flexible and to recognise the range of experiences as well as both accredited and non-accredited study which individual applicants demonstrate.

All programmes

11        For all YTEP’s programmes relevant work and/or professional experience may be considered in lieu of and alongside formal academic qualifications.

12        Applicants who do not meet the standard academic entry requirements may demonstrate their potential to benefit from their chosen programme by means of successful completion of a ‘taster’ module, the submission of recently completed and assessed work, the completion of an assigned task or some other approved piece of evidence.  Alternatively, applicants may be registered for a lower level award in the first instance (eg. a Cert HE instead of a BA) and then transfer to the higher award, subject to satisfactory progress.

13        Applicants for the Foundation Award, Cert HE and Dip HE may be permitted to take one Level 4 module prior to the final decision about entry to the full programme.

14        A good standard of written and spoken English is required of all applicants.  Those for whom English is not their first language should recently have achieved an IELTS exam score as shown in the table below (or equivalent).

15        Applications that do not fulfil the normal entry criteria will be referred via YTEP to the Common Awards Management Board in Durham.

Specific programmes

* All awards are titled Theology, Ministry and Mission (only), except the Cert HE (180), which is titled Christian Ministry and Mission, and the MA, for which there are also programmes in Contemporary Christian Leadership and Worship & Liturgical Studies.

Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL/RPL)

16        Applicants may claim credit for prior learning (APL), either certificated (APCL) or experiential (APEL), if they can demonstrate previous learning that fulfils relevant learning outcomes of their chosen programme.  The maximum number of credits that can be claimed against each award is detailed in the table above.

17        Applicants seeking APEL will be offered support by either their Centre’s named APL contact or the YTEP Academic Co-ordinator in producing the portfolio of evidence needed to demonstrate that they have met the appropriate learning outcomes. 

18        Claims for APL amounting to ⅓ or less of the total credit for the intended award are determined within YTEP.  Larger claims are determined by Durham University.

Appeals and complaints

19        Where applicants believe that they have been unfairly treated by YTEP or one of its constituent partners they may request a review of their application by using the complaints procedure as set out in YTEP’s Student Complaints Policy.

Training & development of staff

20        Supported by YTEP, Centres will ensure that all members of staff involved in the recruitment and admissions process are fully trained and aware of this policy.

Record-keeping

21        YTEP Centres will keep full admissions records for use for monitoring and review purposes both within Centres and across YTEP.

Information for applicants

22        The full Admissions Policy is publicly available separately on the YTEP website. 

Review of this policy

23        The policy is the responsibility of YTEP’s Management Committee and is monitored and reviewed annually.

8.2. Appendix B - Placements Policy

Appendix 1

Student Placement Agreement

8.3. Appendix C - Research Ethics Policy and Guidance

Appendix E

Common Awards Research Ethics Misconduct Policy

INTRODUCTION

This policy sets out the procedure to be followed in a case where a suspicion arises that a student has not followed the YTEP Research Ethics Policy when pursuing an academic assignment for a Common Awards module.

The YTEP Research Ethics Policy sets out the kinds of approval and informed consent required for different kinds of work.  In particular, it sets out different expectations for formal research involving human participants and for placement- or experience-based reflections.  The rules below should be read in the light of the Research Ethics Policy.  They are not intended to impose extra constraints on students but to explain how YTEP will handle breaches of existing constraints. 

While YTEP’s Student Affairs Committee (SASC), constituted as YTEP’s Research Ethics Panel, is responsible for ethical approvals for research activity, it is the YTEP Board of Examiners that considers academic consequences of breaching the Research Ethics Policy.

This policy and the YTEP’s Research Ethics policy are themselves governed by Durham University’s Research Integrity Policy and Code of Good Practice. 

SCOPE OF THIS POLICY

This policy covers the following forms of misconduct:

• failure to obtain appropriate informed consent, to preserve confidentiality and anonymity, or to observe data protection regulations as set out in section A of the YTEP Research Ethics Policy;

and

• failure to follow the ethical approval process for research involving human participants set out in those policies, or failure to observe the limits of the approval granted through that process.

It covers such misconduct in the context of formative or summative assessments, whether in the form of placement- and experience-based reflections, or independent learning projects and/or dissertations that include research with human participants.

It covers the academic consequences of such misconduct – that is the impact on the student’s marks and academic progression.  It does not cover the disciplinary consequences that might be appropriate in serious cases.

It does not cover safeguarding.  If any safeguarding concerns arise in consideration of possible cases of research ethics, those will be handled immediately by invoking YTEP’s and its Centres’ safeguarding procedure.

CATEGORIES OF OFFENCE 

There are two categories of offence: ‘minor infringements’ and ‘more significant offences’.

When all of the following conditions are met, a student is deemed to have committed a minor infringement:

1.    either the work involved was not formal research involving human subjects, as defined in the YTEP Research Ethics Policy or, if it was, ethical approval was sought in advance;

2.    in the judgment of the Chair of the YTEP Board of Examiners

       a.    no harm to any of the people involved has been caused or made possible;
       b.    there would be no reasonable cause for offence or upset should the existence and nature of the breach become known by the persons or in the location named;
       c.    there is no reason to suspect that the subjects of the student’s research were misled about the nature of their engagement with the student, and the student’s intentions in relation to that engagement;

3.    no safeguarding issues are raised (ie. the failures do not relate to children or vulnerable adults);  and

4.    it is possible for the offence to be rectified by the student.

All other infringements will be considered as more significant offences.

In many cases the relevant marker, moderator and external examiner will be the only potential audience for the work in question.  That fact by itself does not make an offence a minor infringement.  If, for instance, sensitive personal information has been revealed even to that limited audience, this counts as a ‘more significant offence’.

PROCESS

This process shall be followed whether the potential misconduct is noticed before or after work is submitted for assessment.

Deciding factors 

At the end of the meeting the panel – excluding the reporting examiner(s) – must decide, on the balance of probabilities, whether any infringement of the Research Ethics Policy has taken place and, if so, how serious it has been.  It shall take into account

    i.       the extensiveness of the breach;

   ii.       the sensitivity of the information involved;

  iii.       the account given by the student, including any mitigation offered.

Based on this decision, the panel must determine the appropriate action to be taken.

Possible outcomes

If the panel judges that the case raises any questions in relation to safeguarding or fitness to practice policies, where they apply, or to discipline, they shall trigger the appropriate YTEP and Centre procedures.

After the panel meeting

A record shall be made of the meeting and written up immediately afterwards.  This report shall specify the nature of the offence committed, the student’s explanation, and the Panel’s decision, and shall be sent electronically to the Common Awards Team at Durham University as soon as possible.  The Common Awards Team shall forward the report to the relevant University Liaison Officer for review and will use the report to monitor practice within and across the Common Awards TEIs.

Where the panel determines one of the outcomes in sections 1 and 2 above, the written report shall be presented to YTEP’s Board of Examiners for consideration.  The Board shall consult YTEP’s external examiner before making a decision about cases involving work submitted for final honours.

The outcomes of the panel meeting and of the consideration of the case by the YTEP Board of Examiners shall also be communicated to the student in writing by the Chair of YTEP’s Board of Examiners.  

In all cases in which the student is not in the final level of their programme of study or has other summative assessments still to complete, a member of the teaching staff of their Centre must have a meeting with them, preferably in person, to counsel them on how to avoid infringing the Research Ethics Policy in future.  A record of this meeting shall be kept in the student’s file.

Appeals

A student may request a formal review of any academic decision affecting them, including a decision made under this policy, by following the Common Awards academic appeal process.  See the Common Awards Complaints and Appeals webpage for more information.  

INFORMATION FOR STUDENTS

8.4. Appendix D - Student Academic Integrity Declaration - 2022/23

This sheet is to be completed and signed in hard copy by every student on a YTEP Common Awards programme at the beginning of their studies and subsequently each academic year.  When it is complete please hand it to your Programme Leader, who will forward it to the YTEP office.

Full name (please print):                          ...........................................................................................

Centre at which you are studying:          ...........................................................................................

Intended award (please delete as appropriate):  Foundation Award / CertHE / CertHE (180 credits) / DipHE / BA / Grad Cert / Grad Dip /
PG Cert / PG Dip / MA ( CCL / TMM / WaLS )

UNFAIR MEANS

The following four examples of unfair means in assessment submissions are serious academic offences and may result in penalties that could have a lasting effect on a student´s career, both at University and beyond.

1.  Plagiarism (either intentional or unintentional) is the stealing of ideas or work of another person (including experts and fellow or former students) and is considered dishonest and unprofessional.  Plagiarism may take the form of cutting and pasting, taking or closely paraphrasing ideas, passages, sections, sentences, paragraphs, drawings, graphs and other graphical material from books, articles, internet sites or any other source (including handouts) and submitting them for assessment without appropriate acknowledgement.

2.  Submitting bought or commissioned work (for example from internet sites, essay “banks” or “mills”) is an extremely serious form of plagiarism.  This may take the form of buying or commissioning either the whole assignment or part of it and implies a clear intention to deceive the examiners.  The University also takes an extremely serious view of any student who sells, offers to sell or passes on their own assignments to other students.

3.  Double submission (or “self-plagiarism”) is resubmitting previously submitted work on one or more occasions (without proper acknowledgement).  This may take the form of copying either the whole assignment or part of it. Normally credit will already have been given for this work.

4.  Collusion is where two or more people work together to produce a piece of work, all or part of which is then submitted by each of them as their own individual work.  This includes passing on work in any format to another student.  Collusion does not occur where students involved in group work are encouraged to work together to produce a single piece of work as part of the assessment process.

DECLARATION

I understand the definitions above and promise that I shall not make use of unfair means in my assessment submissions.  I agree to any materials I submit being used by the marker to detect and take action on any unfair means.

Signed:     ....................................................................................

Date:         ....................................................................................

8.5. Appendix E - Policy on Over-length Work (updated July 2023)

Rationale

Module handbooks include details of the word-limit for each piece of assessed work.  Students are being tested not simply on their ability to write an essay on a particular topic, a report on a placement, a critical reflection or whatever but also on their ability to do so in a set number of words.  Word-limits can be seen as analogous to time limits in examinations.  Learning to make the most of word-limits is part of the skills element of the academic programme and removing unnecessary words almost invariably improves the quality of the writing.

Policy

1.      Students must declare an exact word-count when submitting written assessments. Deliberately misrepresenting the length of an assessment will be treated as an act of dishonesty and will be noted as a disciplinary offence on the student’s record.

2.      There are no penalties for under-length work.  Work that is significantly under-length is likely to be self-penalising.

3.      The penalties for over-length work specified below apply to all assessments for which there is a word-limit, including postgraduate dissertations.

4.      The assessment word-limit includes all the main text (including any tables of data), any assignment title, abstract, footnotes (excluding those used simply for the purpose of referencing and citation) and any in-text citations.

5.      The assessment word-limit excludes the text on any cover-sheet (including any description of the assignment task or question), glossary of terms, student declaration, document header, bibliography, appendices, graphs and images.

6.      Normally documents will be produced using Microsoft Word or similar software and the word-count calculations indicated by such software will be used.

7.      For all assessments there is a grace interval of 10% of the assigned word limit.  Students will not be penalised for exceeding the stated word-count by up to 10% of that limit.  If a student exceeds the word limit by more than 10%, the student is penalised at the rate of 1 mark per 1% over the 10% concession. Hence, a student who writes an assignment that is 11% over the word limit loses 1 mark; a student who writes 25% over the limit loses 15 marks.

8.      Summary of the penalties for over-length work are as follows:

9.    In cases where the application of a penalty for exceeding the word limit would reduce the mark of an assignment which would otherwise pass to a mark below pass level, then the mark for the assignment should instead be capped at pass level.

10.    For students with a disability statement reasonable adjustments may be made to word-limits as appropriate.

8.6. Appendix F - Policy on Extensions and Late Submissions

Extensions to assessment deadlines 

Normally the only grounds on which an extension will be granted are where circumstances beyond the control of the student have prevented submission.

Extensions to assessment deadlines may be approved by the Chair of the YTEP Board of Examiners (or their nominee), provided that the extension is not complex and does not extend across two academic years.  Heads of Centre will normally act as nominees for this purpose.  They are required to inform YTEP of all extensions granted (for recording purposes) and to consult the Chair of the Board of Examiners where a simple one-off extension will not provide an adequate solution to a student’s difficulties (eg. where a suspension of studies might be required). 

If a proposed extension would take the student from one academic year into the next it needs to be referred by the Chair of the Board of Examiners to the Common Awards Management Board.

When an extension is granted, the new deadline and any special arrangements for submission must be made clear to the student, in writing.

To apply for an extension to an assessment deadline, a student must complete and submit an Extension Request Form (downloadable from the Student Handbook section of the YTEP Moodle site) and submit it to their Head of Centre or Module Tutor.

Late submission (without an extension)

If a student fails to submit a piece of summative assessed work (including a dissertation) by either the published deadline or a previously approved extended deadline, the following policy and procedures will apply:

(i)      Students who submit their summative assessed work late but within five working days of the deadline shall be penalised by having the mark for that piece of work capped at the module pass mark.  The work will be marked and feedback provided.  The mark that would have been awarded to the student had the penalty not been applied should be indicated to the student.

(ii)      Summative assessed work submitted more than five working days after the deadline will not be marked and a mark of zero will be recorded.

(iii)     In the event that different deadlines for electronic and hard copy formats of the same piece of summative assessed work have been specified, the penalty in (i) above will apply if the earlier of the two deadlines is missed by the student.

Approved June 2015, updated March 2017, reviewed June 2021 (YTEP CAMC)

8.7. Appendix G - Extension Request Form

Extensions to assessment deadlines

Extensions to assessment deadlines may be approved by the Chair of the YTEP Board of Examiners (or their nominee), provided that the extension is not complex and does not extend across two academic years.  Normally the only grounds on which an extension will be granted are where circumstances beyond the control of the student have prevented submission.  This might include ill health, extreme personal circumstances or other unforeseen situations.  Documentary evidence may be required.  All requests must be submitted prior to the original submission date.

Requesting an extension

Complete the form and submit it to your Head of Centre or Module Tutor.  Where you are providing documentary evidence (e.g. medical certificates) please attach copies either separately in hard copy or in scanned format.

8.8. Appendix H - Serious Adverse Circumstances (SACs) Procedure

SACs Procedure

A       SCOPE OF THIS PROCEDURE

1          This SACs procedure is available to students enrolled on Common Awards programmes delivered by Centres within the Yorkshire Theological Education Partnership (YTEP).  It specifically applies to all students who have suffered exceptional individual adverse circumstances during their studies and assessment for modules, which other mechanisms available have not been able to mitigate in full.

2          This procedure does not apply in relation to the general circumstances of whole cohorts of students, eg. challenges thrown up by the COVID-19 pandemic, which are catered for by other measures.  Students should only resort to it if and when in-year mitigation measures, such as the adjustment of assessments and extensions to assignment deadlines, have been unable to take full account of their individual circumstances.

3          This procedure fleshes out Durham University’s SACs Procedure, which overrides any provision within it.  The University has two main principles which guide how it deals with students and serious adverse circumstances:

·         Circumstances should be mitigated at the earliest opportunity, and dealt with as part of the setting and completing of assessments wherever possible.

·         Marks should not be given or changed as a result of a student’s circumstances.

4          The University defines serious adverse circumstances as:

exceptional personal circumstances, outside your control, that have prevented you from either acquiring or demonstrating the skills, knowledge or competencies required to meet the learning outcomes associated with an assessment that contributes to the qualification for which you are studying, notwithstanding your best efforts, in consultation with your Theological Education Institution, to mitigate those circumstances.

5          This procedure sets out the steps to be taken by YTEP students and staff to ensure that SAC cases are dealt with in a fair and timely manner.  Adherence to it will ensure that cases are given full consideration by the YTEP Student Affairs Sub-Committee (SASC) and Board of Examiners and, ultimately, by the overarching Common Awards Board of Examiners in Durham.

B       REQUEST BY A STUDENT

6          A student who experiences serious adverse circumstances affecting their performance in any formal assessment should approach discuss these informally with their module tutor or programme leader in their Centre in the first instance.  That member of staff will advise them about options available to them in terms of the adjustment of assessments, extensions to assignment deadlines and the suspension of their studies.  Normally a formal SAC submission should be made only when such solutions have been exhausted.

7          To initiate a formal SAC case, the student needs to complete the YTEP SAC form, available on the YTEP Moodle site.  They should then submit this to the designated member of staff in their Centre, who should add any appropriate supporting comments in either or both of the sections for these on the form.  That member of staff will forward the completed form to the YTEP Administrative Officer ahead of the submission deadline (the second Monday of June for autumn and spring term modules or the third Monday of September for summer term modules).  This should all be done electronically, unless it is impossible to scan all the supporting evidence, for example.

8          In exceptional circumstances, when a student does not wish to share very sensitive information with a member of staff in their Centre, they should consult the YTEP Academic Co-ordinator, who will advise them on how to proceed.

C         CONSIDERATION BY THE YTEP STUDENT AFFAIRS SUB-COMMITTEE

9          YTEP staff will check the submitted form and any supporting evidence for completeness and sense, and obtain any necessary clarification from the student or their Centre.  They will then present the form and its supporting evidence to the YTEP Student Affairs Sub-Committee (3-4 staff from across YTEP who act as the Scrutiny Sub-Committee of the TEI Board of Examiners prescribed by Durham University).

10        SASC will grade the seriousness of the impact of the student’s SACs in accordance with the scale in Durham University’s guidance.  Only this grade (and the assessment(s) to which it applies) will be reported (anonymously) to the YTEP Board of Examiners.

D       CONSIDERATION BY THE YTEP BOARD OF EXAMINERS

11        The YTEP Board of Examiners will not see either the student’s SAC form or any of their supporting evidence.  It will take only the SAC impact grade into consideration in, as applicable, either determining whether the student should continue or progress in their studies, or recommending to the overarching Board of Examiners that they should receive an award.

12        The Board of Examiners will not adjust any assessment component or module marks in the light of a student’s SACs.  Rather, it will consider whether the student should be deemed to have passed the module notwithstanding a failing mark or should be given an opportunity to retake any failed assessments (as a first attempt instead of as a capped second attempt).  The YTEP Board of Examiners’ recommendations are subject to final ratification by the Durham University’s overarching Common Awards Board of Examiners.

E         INTERPRETATION OF THIS PROCEDURE

13        Further guidance on this procedure is available from the YTEP Academic Co-ordinator.

F          REVIEW OF THIS PROCEDURE

8.9. Appendix I - Serious Adverse Circumstances Claim form

SACs Claim

A.  Student & programme

I confirm that I have read and understood Durham University’s guidance on Absence, Illness or Other Adverse Circumstances and the YTEP SACs Procedure.

B.  Circumstances that have affected my studies/assessment

C.  Assessment(s) affected by SACs

Please copy, paste and complete this table for each separate assessment affected.

8.10. Appendix J - Student Complaints Policy and Procedure

INTRODUCTION AND PRINCIPLES

1.      YTEP aims to provide a high standard and quality of service in respect of its academic provision, but recognises that occasionally things do go wrong.  As part of its commitment to enhancing the student experience, this procedure has been established to deal with academic complaints from students.

2.      Definitions:

3.      Students who have a complaint to make should follow the procedure below:

(i)         for minor matters in relation to module or programme design and delivery: students should speak with the Module Tutor, Centre Module Leader or Head of Centre in the first instance;

(ii)        for matters of significance relating to any staff member or tutor: students should contact the YTEP Academic Co-ordinator.  (In the event of the complaint relating to the Academic Co-ordinator they should contact the Chair of the Management Committee.  This arrangement is implicit in the remainder of this document.)

(iii)       students who wish to make a complaint about a fellow student: if the matter cannot be resolved student-to-student, the student who wishes to make a complaint should contact the Head of Centre.

4.      As matters that are dealt with informally at an early stage have the best chance of being resolved effectively, the formal stage of this procedure should only be applied if informal procedures have been exhausted and the complainant remains dissatisfied.

5.      It is recognised, however, that there may be occasions when an informal approach is not appropriate.  In such instances the student may wish to proceed to a formal stage in the procedure, giving reasons for doing so.  In such situations the recipient of the complaint should decide at which stage in the procedure set out below the complaint should most appropriately be considered, taking account of its particular nature and circumstances.

6.      In respect of particularly serious complaints, the student may write directly to the YTEP Academic Co-ordinator without having followed the informal or formal stages of this procedure set out below.  In such cases the YTEP Academic Co-ordinator, in consultation with the relevant Head of Centre, shall decide whether or not to conduct his or her own investigation into the complaint or whether it should more appropriately be referred to an earlier stage in the procedure.

7.      Every reasonable effort will be made to deal promptly and efficiently with all complaints, to investigate them thoroughly, objectively and independently and to seek to resolve them satisfactorily.  If a complaint is upheld, YTEP will seek to provide an appropriate response and will correct any mistakes or misunderstandings and will take any other action as appropriate.  If a complaint is not upheld, reasons for that decision will be given in a timely manner.

8.      All complaints will be dealt with in confidence with the proviso that enquiries will have to be made to investigate the matters that are the subject of the complaint.  An individual against whom a complaint is made has the right to be supplied with a copy of the complaint and to comment on it.  A complaint cannot be investigated if the student does not wish the substance of the allegation to be made known to the individual concerned.

9.      YTEP will treat complaints seriously and will deal with them without recrimination.

10.   Where a complaint is shown to be frivolous, vexatious or motivated by malice, it will be dismissed and disciplinary action may be taken against the student.

11.   The time limits set out in this procedure will normally be followed.  However, where, for good reason, this is not possible, the complainant will be kept informed of progress.

SCOPE OF THE PROCEDURE

12.   The procedure is designed to encompass academic complaints from students concerning their experience as a YTEP student on the Common Awards programmes.

13.   ‘Academic complaints’ can relate to any aspect of the approved academic provision including (but not restricted to) complaints from students concerning their experience of:

a.      the arrangements for, or delivery of, teaching or assessment for the academic programme;

b.      the adequacy of supervision for modules that are a formal and assessed part of the academic programme;

c.      the academic support that is part of the academic programme;

d.      assessed placements that are a formal part of the academic programme;

e.      administrative or support services that relate to the academic programme;

f.       information or publicity in relation to the academic programme;

g.      the infrastructure for academic programmes, including learning resources and teaching spaces.

14.  The above is not a definitive or exhaustive list; academic complaints may relate to other areas of academic provision or support where these are perceived to have had a negative impact on the student’s academic programme or progress. 

15.  This procedure does not extend to ‘academic appeals’ (i.e. appeals relating to examinations or assessments or to academic progress or against expulsion or exclusion on academic grounds).  Information on the University’s approach to academic appeals is available in the University Calendar, General Regulation VII - Academic Appeals.

16.  Equally, the procedure does not cover the following, for which separate procedures exist:

a.      complaints involving a decision that a student has failed to meet his/her academic commitments (see Durham University’s Academic Progress Policy for Common Awards);

b.      complaints involving an allegation of misconduct by a student (see the University  Calendar, General Regulation IV – Discipline).

c.      complaints involving an allegation of harassment (see the University’s Respect at Study Policy and Code of Practice and Procedures for Students to make a Complaint about Harassment).

17.   It is expected that the student concerned will pursue the complaint personally; complaints submitted by a third party will not normally be accepted.

18.   The effectiveness of any complaints procedure depends on YTEP being able to collect appropriate information from the parties involved in order to investigate the matter properly.  For this reason, anonymous complaints will not be dealt with under this procedure.  It is at the discretion of the person receiving an anonymous complaint to determine how the matter is handled.

19.   Complaints by a group of students are often of a general nature where it is usually more appropriate for the students to raise the matter with a student representative in the first instance.  Complaints may then be made by a group of students if the relevant representation system has not achieved a satisfactory outcome, or this is not thought to be an appropriate route.

20.   If the complainant remains dissatisfied once YTEP’s informal and formal procedures are exhausted, the student will have the right to request a review by Durham University.  The University will determine whether to review the complaint to ascertain whether YTEP’s policy and processes had been implemented correctly.

21.   It is YTEP’s practice to review its policies and procedures on an annual basis in order to identify any areas of practice or provision for enhancement.

STAGES OF THE PROCESS

Overview

22.   The complaints process has 3 Stages:

Stage 1: Informal Stage: Centre level

23.   Most complaints can be resolved informally and, where practicable, a complaint should be dealt with as close as possible to the point at which it arises.  A student who wishes to complain should, therefore, initially discuss the matter with those directly responsible.  If the student is unhappy about approaching the person directly responsible, they may seek counsel from the Head of Centre or another member of the YTEP staff.

24.   Students should raise a complaint no more than 28 days after the event that the complaint concerns unless there is good reason for the delay.

25.   The Head of Centre, or YTEP Academic Co-ordinator, or other designated officer, should, if possible, have a face-to-face discussion with the student concerned, to come to an understanding of the exact nature of the student's dissatisfaction and to explore what outcome the student seeks.

26.   If appropriate, the Head of Centre, or YTEP Academic Co-ordinator, or other designated officer, should initiate mediation as part of the informal resolution.

27.   Wherever possible, student complaints should be resolved at this informal level, without the need to resort to formal proceedings.  A student should normally expect to receive a written or verbal acknowledgement within five working days and a full response within fifteen working days of receipt of the complaint.

28.   At the conclusion of any informal resolution attempts, the student will be informed of the formal complaint procedure (Stage 2).

Stage 2: Formal Stage: YTEP

29.   If the Stage 1 procedures have been exhausted, and the student is not satisfied with the response, he or she may initiate a formal complaint to the YTEP Academic Co-ordinator using the Complaints Form which can be downloaded from the YTEP web site.

30.   If a complaint is received at Stage 2, without prior consideration at Stage 1, YTEP will normally try to resolve the complaint using informal mechanism in the first instance where appropriate.

31.   The information to be included in the complaint by the student is as follows (students are advised to use the appropriate form on which to submit this information):

a)     details of the complaint;

b)     a statement of the action already taken to try and resolve the complaint informally and why the response given is considered unsatisfactory;

c)     any supporting information or evidence;

d)     the form of resolution or redress sought.

32.   The YTEP Academic Co-ordinator will acknowledge receipt of the complaint within five working days.

33.   The person dealing with the formal complaint will be independent of the source of the complaint. The decision about who will conduct the investigation will be agreed by the Chair of the Management Committee and the YTEP Academic Co-ordinator.

34.   The person dealing with the formal complaint will seek resolution of the complaint by a means appropriate to its nature and circumstance.  Such means may include:

a.      correspondence between the parties;

b.      negotiation with the student or with appropriate members of staff or with both;

c.      facilitation of a conciliation meeting between the student and student/staff concerned;

d.      facilitation of a mediation meeting between the student and student/staff concerned.

35.   If the person dealing with the formal complaint decides to investigate the complaint via correspondence, the student bringing forward the complaint will be sent a copy of any comments obtained during this process and will be invited to submit a response.  This will be done prior to a decision being reached in relation to the complaint.

36.   In very exceptional circumstances (for example, in particularly complex cases, or those involving disciplinary issues), provisions may be made for hearings.

37.   Such hearings will be conducted by the person dealing with the complaint accompanied by a member of the Management Committee who will be independent of the source of the complaint.  The student involved will be given at least five working days’ notice of the date and time of the hearing. The student will be invited to attend the hearing and may be accompanied by a fellow student or a member of staff.

38.   The Level 1 procedures (Stages 1 and 2 combined) should normally be completed, and a written response sent to the student, within eight weeks of the complaint being received. 

39.   The possible outcomes from the Stage 2 process include:

a.      a resolution, reached in co-operation with the student, following conciliation or mediation if appropriate;

b.      if the complaint is upheld, a recommendation will be made outlining how the issue(s) identified in the complaint should be addressed including, if applicable, appropriate redress to the student;

c.      dismissal of the complaint with reasons given to the student in writing.

40.   The response will also inform the student of their right to request a review of the complaint by Durham University (i.e. Stage 3 of the process).

41.   A copy of the letter to the complainant informing them of the outcome of their complaint will be retained for six years from the period of the last action.

Stage 3: Review Stage: University

42.   If the student is dissatisfied with the outcome of Stage 2, and believes that the complaint has been handled improperly or unfairly according to this policy, the student may request that the complaint is reviewed by Durham University.

43.   The student can request a review by writing to Durham University no later than 10 working days after the date of the Stage 2 response.

44.   The student must provide the following information:

a.      details of the complaint (including relevant correspondence from Stages 1 and 2, and any further new supporting documentation);

b.      details of why the student remains dissatisfied;

c.      details of the form of resolution or redress sought.

45.   Receipt of the request for a review will be acknowledged by the University within five working days.  This acknowledgement will advise students that they may seek advice from the Durham Students’ Union (DSU) throughout the Stage 3 process.

46.   The University will determine whether to review the complaint to ascertain whether the TEI’s policy and processes had been implemented correctly.

47.   The possible outcomes include:

a.         if procedural irregularities are identified: the complaint will normally be referred back to the TEI for re-investigation;

b.         if the complaint is deemed to be outside the parameters of an ‘academic complaint’ (as defined in para. 13, above): the complaint will be referred back to the TEI for investigation as a complaint that is outwith the Common Awards provision;

c.         if the TEI’s policies and processes had been implemented correctly: the complaint normally will be dismissed, the reasons for dismissal will be provided to the student in writing, and a completion of procedures letter will be issued.

48.   The student will be notified of the University’s decision within 28 days of the University’s receipt of the request for a review.

49.   If the University dismisses the review request there shall be no further opportunity for the complaint to be pursued within the University.

50.   The University’s formal response at the completion of Stage 3 will advise the student that they can refer their complaint to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator.

OFFICE OF THE INDEPENDENT ADJUDICATOR (OIAHE)

51.   If Stages 1-3 have been completed and the student remains dissatisfied with the outcome, the student may complain to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIAHE) within 3 months of the issue of a completion of procedures letter by the University.

52.   Information about the OIAHE and the procedure for submitting complaints can be obtained from Durham University’s Curriculum, Learning & Assessment Service, the Durham Students' Union website, or from the OIAHE website: www.oiahe.org.uk.

8.11. Appendix K - Student Rep Role Descriptions

Student Members of the Common Awards Management Committee (CAMC)

Each year the YTEP Common Awards Management Committee invites up to three YTEP Common Awards students to be members to provide a student voice and perspective on committee business.

Students are nominated and elected from across the YTEP student body at the beginning of each academic year.  Students must be registered on a Common Award programme and may be from any Centre, programme or level of study.  Students can self-nominate and may, but are not required to be, Centre reps.  Should an election be necessary, YTEP will organise this and all students enrolled on Common Awards programmes will be eligible to vote.

Role Description

·    To be present (either in person or via electronic media) at the termly Common Awards Management Committee meeting.

·    To read all papers in advance of the meeting and contribute to the business, providing a student perspective on items under discussion.

·    To forward any items of student feedback that they wish to raise at the meeting in advance to the YTEP Academic Co-ordinator, Martine Somerville (martine.somerville@mirfield.org.uk )

NB:

CAMC meetings may include Reserved Business, for which student members would be asked to withdraw.

Student members may from time to time choose, in concert with other CAMC student representatives, to consult more fully with student Centre representatives on any matters of particular import.

CAMC will feed back to students after each meeting how it is responding to their comments.

YTEP Centre Student Representatives

Each Centre will appoint a minimum of two students (spanning different levels and programmes) who will act as representatives to the Centre’s leadership and management group(s).  The mechanics of consultation between students will be decided and managed by Centres as appropriate locally.

Role Description

·    To attend and contribute to Centre leadership and management committees as agreed at Centre Level.

·    To seek and raise student feedback to the Centre leadership and management via its committee or other reporting structures.

·    Following consultation with their peers and using the YTEP pro-forma, to submit a brief written report to the termly YTEP Common Awards Management Committee (CAMC) (one per Centre).

·    To report back to students on matters raised and discussed at Centre committee meetings.

·    To report back to students on feedback and responses received from YTEP CAMC.

8.12. Appendix L - Student Rep Report to CAMC proforma

Student Representative Report
to the
Common Awards Management Committee

Centre:                       

Student Name(s):      

Date:                          

At YTEP we continually seek to improve the quality of our partners’ academic provision. Centre Committees and Common Awards Management Committee (CAMC) regularly review feedback from a range of sources (including module evaluations). To assist with this process, please give brief bullet-point notes of significant issues, highlighting any matters that you would particularly like CAMC to be aware of. If you have nothing to share under any of the headings, feel free to state ‘nothing at this time’.

Only one student rep report should be submitted for each YTEP Centre to each meeting of CAMC.

8.13. Appendix M - Safeguarding Policy

Context and YTEP’s responsibilities

1          YTEP seeks to ensure that safeguarding is given due priority in all the activities for which it is responsible.  In practice the vast majority of activities over which YTEP has some oversight are organised by its partner bodies (Centres). 

2          YTEP partners operate under safeguarding frameworks that are tailored to their particular contexts and needs.  YTEP’s responsibility in this regard is to assure itself that all partners have robust, appropriate, and regularly-reviewed safeguarding policies in place, which it will discharge primarily by monitoring Centres’ Annual Self-Evaluation (ASE) returns.

3          YTEP is nevertheless directly responsible for the actions of its own employees and agents (ie. those acting directly on its behalf but not employed by it).  The policy statement below relates to this responsibility.

Policy

4        YTEP is committed to:

• promoting a safe environment and culture;
• safely recruiting and supporting any staff or agents with any responsibility related to vulnerable adults, children or young people;
• responding promptly to every safeguarding concern or allegation;
• caring pastorally for victims/survivors of abuse and other affected persons;
• caring pastorally for those who are the subject of concerns or allegations of abuse and other affected persons;
• responding to those who may pose a present risk to others.

5        YTEP will: 

• create a safe and caring place for all, seeking to apply best practice from both the church and higher education sector;
• have a named Safeguarding Lead to work with the Trustees to implement policy and procedures;
• safely recruit, train and support all those with any responsibility for vulnerable adults, children or young people to have the confidence and skills to recognise and respond to abuse;
• ensure that there is appropriate insurance cover for all activities involving adults and children undertaken in the name of YTEP;
• display on the YTEP website and signpost in the YTEP Student and Staff Handbooks both this policy and the details of whom to contact if there are safeguarding concerns or support needs;
• listen to, and take seriously, all those who disclose abuse;
• take steps to protect adults and children when a safeguarding concern of any kind arises, following the guidance of the House of Bishops of the Church of England, including notifying the statutory agencies and relevant Diocesan Safeguarding Adviser (DSA) immediately;
• offer support to victims/survivors of abuse regardless of the type of abuse, when or where it occurred;
• care for and monitor any member of the church and academic community who may pose a risk to adults and children, whilst maintaining appropriate confidentiality and the safety of all parties;
• ensure that health and safety policy, procedures and risk assessments are in place and that these are reviewed annually;
• review the implementation of this Safeguarding Policy and its associated procedures and practices at least annually.

6        Each person who works for YTEP, whether as its employee or as an agent, will agree to abide by this policy and any guidelines and procedures established by YTEP.

7        The YTEP Safeguarding Lead is currently:

Revd Dr Hayley Matthews

Director of Lay Training

Email: hayley.matthews@leeds.anglican.org

Phone: 0113 353 0283

8        Any suspicions or allegation of abuse against someone working for YTEP should be raised with the Safeguarding Lead in the first instance.  Since it is anticipated that cases will be rare and their circumstances infinitely varied, YTEP does not have its own detailed procedures for handling cases.  Instead, when a case does arise, the Safeguarding Lead will immediately take advice from a DSA about how to proceed and seek to comply with the latest best practice.

9        The Safeguarding Lead will ensure that appropriate (confidential) records are kept and cases reported (anonymously, if appropriate) to the YTEP Trustees and other bodies with a legitimate interest.

10      Further information and advice is available from:

Martine Somerville

YTEP Academic Co-ordinator

martine.somerville@mirfield.org.uk

Version 1:        Approved by YTEP Trustees on 30 November 2020

9. Title pages

   Yorkshire Theological Education Partnership

COMMON AWARDS

STUDENT HANDBOOK

2022/23

This is the generic student handbook which covers topics that apply to all YTEP Centres and students.  Additional Centre-specific information will be provided by your Programme Leader.

If you wish to discover more about other aspects of policies and procedures which relate to Common Awards more generally this is the link to the Durham University Common Awards website. 

A few commonly used expressions

10. Full Contents list

1.         Welcome to YTEP                                                                                                             

2.         Starting as a Student

2.1      Admission                                                                                                                   

2.2      Registration and student records                                                                               

2.3      Student ID cards                                                                                                        

2.4      YTEP Moodle                                                                                                             

2.5      Information about your programme                                                                           

3.         Undertaking your studies

3.1      Planning                                                                                                                     

3.2      Learning resources                                                                                                    

3.3      Referencing                                                                                                               

3.4      Placements                                                                                                                

3.5      Research and dissertations                                                                                        

4.         Assessment                                                                                                                       

4.1      Planning assignments                                                                                                

4.2      Formatting assignments                                                                                             

4.3      Appendices                                                                                                                

4.4      Inclusive language                                                                                                     

4.5      Academic referencing                                                                                               

4.6      Referencing Biblical texts                                                                                          

4.7      All your own work

4.8      Word-counts                                                                                                               

4.9      Submitting your work                                                                                                 

4.10    Meeting deadlines and seeking extensions                                                               

4.11    Serious adverse circumstances (SACs)                                                                   

4.12    Suspensions and withdrawals                                                                                    

5.         Outcomes of assessment

5.1      Marking and moderation                                                                                            

5.2      Results                                                                                                                       

5.3      Feedback to students                                                                                                 

5.4      Durham University’s response to COVID-19                                                            

5.5      Academic progress                                                                                                    

6.         Academic support and feedback from students

6.1      Dealing with problems that arise during your studies                                                

6.2      Raising queries and concerns                                                                                    

6.3      Academic appeals                                                                                                     

6.4      ‘The student voice’                                                                                                     

6.5      Student representatives                                                                                             

7.         How YTEP manages Common Awards

7.1      Programmes                                                                                                              

7.2      YTEP academic management                                                                                  

7.3      Common Awards Management Board                                                                      

7.4      Other national groups                                                                                                 

7.5      Safeguarding                                                                                                              

APPENDICES – YTEP Policies, Procedures and Forms                                                       

A       Admissions Policy Summary                                                                                              

B       Placements Policy                                                                                                               

C       Research Ethics Policy and Guidance                                                                               

D       Student Academic Integrity Declaration form 2022/23                                                       

E       Policy on Over-length Work                                                                                                

F       Policy on Extensions and Late Submission                                                                        

G       Extension Request Form                                                                                                     

H       Serious Adverse Circumstances Procedure                                                                       

I         Serious Adverse Circumstances Claim Form                                                                    

J        Student Complaints Policy and Procedure                                                                         

K       Student Rep Role Descriptions                                                                                           

L        Student Rep Report to CAMC proforma                                                                            

M      Safeguarding Policy                                                                                                            

Programme Regulations

Module lists for all YTEP’s Centres are available at:

·     YTEP Moodle site (Staff only)

·     Durham Common Awards website