аЯрЁБс>ўџ KMўџџџJџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџьЅС` №Пbjbjц‡ц‡ ;&„э„эѓ%џџџџџџЄ@@@@@@@vдЎ Ў Ў 8ц ђ Jš 6  "4 4 4  % 1        $аh8ф? @9   9 9 ? @@4 4 лT љ љ љ 9 Ž@4 @4  љ 9  љ љ @@љ 4  №7|ьч‡ЫЎ Ч pљ  j 0š љ 7 jљ @љ 9 9 љ 9 9 9 9 9 ? ? Ё X9 9 9 š 9 9 9 9 JJJdЎ JJJЎ Thv@@@@@@џџџџ British History I Staff/Student Liaison Meeting 18 November 2010 Present: Sharon Adams, Jacqueline Barrett, Gordon Clark, Amabel Crowe, Anna Groundwater, Fergus Haigh, Hayley Lenahan, Katie Stewart, Tom Webster Apologies: Adam Budd, Jeremy Crang, Wendy Ugolini Open Floor Feedback: Some students complained of the delay in first essays being returned too close to second essay deadline. Some bibliographical errors were noted for the second essay reading list (as they were reported, they were non-specific). It was noted that some of the articles were not available on JSTOR; part of the response was to make it clearer that hard copies were available, possibly placed in Reserve and that JSTOR is not the only electronic option. A further suggestion was that more electronically available should be included on the relevant reading lists. Part of this was consequent upon the inadequate supply of relevant books in the library, particularly for the earlier selection of first essay questions. During the discussion of the pros and cons of staggered deadlines for survey courses it emerged that the first deadline for European History I actually coincided with the first for BHI this year. Responses to particular issues. Appraisal of advice on writing essays: the material in the course book was recommended by students, suggesting greater emphasis being placed on holding on to the copy and paying closer attention to it. General guidance within tutorials was favoured but this was followed by enthusiasm for detailed feedback from tutors. Some credit was given to broad, overall feedback given communally; this was regarded as complementary to one-to-one feedback from tutors. The specifics of accuracy were valued but this was placed alongside an enthusiasm for suggestions in terms of general delivery, structure, balance between narrative and analysis and so forth. One request for making available (anonymous) previous essays as examples available to students starting out was greeted with general approval. Those students who received the mark sheet with the comments on their essays said that they valued the specifics and several students remarked on its absence with regret. One option which was suggested was the possibility of talking to tutors individually about essays, presumably during the process of writing it, for guidance. Appraisal of tutorials: the semi-detached nature of the relationship between tutorials and lectures was appreciated, partly because the effort to pack a discussion of three lectures each week into 50 minutes was seen as unproductive and partly because it enabled tutors to devote time to matters about which they were enthusiastic, generally seen as a positive element. In addition, it was observed that tutorials that were less structured by an external plan allowed space for students to ask questions, voice difficulties indirectly related to the specific topic of the day. A couple of students voiced reservations in that there was a potential for a lack of focus. When this was explored in greater depth, the difficulty which needed to be addressed was internal: that it would be appreciated if students were given a more clear sense of what was to follow week by week, primarily to an awareness of the next week’s topic, to provide reading lists or material or a preparatory exercise rather than having to hit the ground running. One student suggested exploring the possibility of dividing tutorials on the basis of ability and/or previous history experience. Appraisal of reading lists: the suggested textbooks received a wholly positive response. In particular, the time given to making it clear which of the works suited those students least familiar with the period and which were more suitable for the more experienced students, enabling students to make a well-informed choice in their purchases, was appreciated and it was suggested that this would be profitably employed across the board. Appraisal of lectures: handouts were very positively received and seen as very useful. Discussed in greater detail it emerged that the elements that were most appreciated were ones that laid out the narrative and the structure of the lecture along with the central characters and dates, the factual details upon which to hang an analysis. Comparisons were made, mostly with experiences elsewhere, and the least useful were judged to be those with a minimalist, bullet point approach which were found to be of little use once detached from the actual lecture. It was preferred that they were best as a compromise between too short and too detailed, creating a space upon which to add notes and preventing the experience of playing catch-up on details and lessening the focus on the analysis. Moving on to the style and delivery of lectures, the demeanour and manner of lecturers, the first identified criterion for ‘a good lecturer’ was one who was passionate about the subject, and all lecturers were seen as meeting that criterion. The meeting was concluded with thanks to the student representatives for their forthright and intelligent feedback.     PAGE  PAGE 2 A  Ћ Ы Ь ђ /FОйtŠѓєіїљњќ§џ  ѓшѓшѓшѓшѓшѓшѓшрмрмрмрмвЬвЬмвПЬвАвЬмшhДП0JOJQJmHnHuh–Vh™^ƒ0JOJQJ h™^ƒ0Jjh™^ƒ0JUh™^ƒjh™^ƒUh–Vh™^ƒOJQJh–Vh™^ƒ5OJQJ$ABде  Њ Ћ Ы Ь ./НОst}~ђѓѕіјљћќўџ§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ѓўўџ  ѓёяѓёяяя „ќџ„&`#$gd™^ƒ9 01hP:p™^ƒА|. АШA!А "А # $ %ААТАТ Ф†œ@@ёџ@ Й–NormalCJ_H aJmH sH tH DA@ђџЁD Default Paragraph FontRiѓџГR  Table Normalі4ж l4жaі (kєџС(No List 4 @ђ4 –VFooter  ЦрР!.)@Ђ. –V Page Number4@4 –VHeader  ЦрР! &џџџџABдеЊЋЫЬ. / <#Ќ<#Ќ<#Ќ<#Ќ<#Ќ<#Ќ <#Ќ<#Ќ<#Ќ<#Ќ<#Ќ<#Ќ<#ЌABдеЊЋЫЬ. / Н О st}~ђѓѕіјљћќўџ  ˜0@˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€yЩ0Йy‰0ЙyЩ0Йy‰0ЙyЩ0Йy‰0ЙyЩ0Йy‰0ЙyЩ0ЙyЩ0€yЩ0€˜@0€€˜@0€€yЩ0Йy‰0јЙ $$$'џ  '!•!џ•€№8№@ёџџџ€€€ї№’№№0№( № №№B №S №ПЫџ ?№џџ_GoBackддЦЭЮвгкѓѓѕѕііјљћќўџ ЋЪифѓѓѕѕііјљћќўџ33ђѓѓѕѕііјљћќўџ ѓѓѕѕііјљћќўџх™^ƒДПџ@€lw№ @џџUnknownџџџџџџџџџџџџG‡z €џTimes New Roman5€Symbol3& ‡z €џArialG5€  П ћќЧhŸMS Mincho-џ3џ fg7я K@ŸCambria ˆ№аh/›ыІ/›ыІњљ $њљ $1№  ДД4щщ}2ƒ№HP №џ?џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ›@Т2џџ@British History I Staff/Student Liaison Meeting 18 November 2010 Tom WebsterKatherine Christieўџр…ŸђљOhЋ‘+'Гй0œ7˜ф№  <H h t €Œ”œЄЌфDBritish History I Staff/Student Liaison Meeting 18 November 2010 Tom WebsterNormalKatherine Christie2Microsoft Office Word@вIk@:€лч‡Ы@:€лч‡ЫњљGш5џџџџўQt$  у‘  uS.ћМ"SystemS2/Œѓopƒ‚9€- -ћœџМ@"Arial- k2 ДX@^iBritish History I Staff/Student Liaison Meeting 18 November 2010H'!8=H8!=(5C!8!!C!==8=!=88==S78!==88H=68Y=8'8878 2 Дe^i 8ћœџ@"Arial- 2 'X^i 6}2 šXL^iPresent: Sharon Adams, Jacqueline Barrett, Gordon Clark, Amabel Crowe, Anna C!8288C78!87C78S228278888C8!!8N8!887H8!2BT878H!8G8C888s2 XE^iGroundwater, Fergus Haigh, Hayley Lenahan, Katie Stewart, Tom WebsterN!8888G88!<8!782H878H81918887878C78B8G8!=8Sa7718! 2 O^i 5 2 €X^i 6L2 ѓX+^iApologies: Adam Budd, Jeremy Crang, Wendy U C888782B87TB87728!7T1H!887b7771I2 ѓЯ ^igolini788 2 ѓИ ^i 7 2 fX^i 6-)2 йX^iOpen Floor Feedback:N=8===='=78==877"-g2 йx=^i Some students complained of the delay in first essays being 0B8S827878227T8888778788818 28228128887‰2 LXT^ireturned too close to second essay deadline. Some bibliographical errors were noted !88!878782827818287882281878878C8S88887!888287!!8!2G8!88878v2 ПXG^ifor the second essay reading list (as they were reported, they were non8!8728278882281!888872!82881G8"8!888!88781G8!8888 2 ПЄ^i-!2 ПХ ^ispecific). 27822!2 Пk^iIt 2 2XM^iwas noted that some of the articles were not available on JSTOR; part of the G8288888727T87878!282G8!888818888881B>NH78!787‰2 ЅXT^iresponse was to make it clearer that hard copies were available, possibly placed in !8288818G828T827288!8!8888!818782G8!8818888881281882888ˆ2 XS^iReserve and that JSTOR is not the only electronic option. A further suggestion was H828!18888882B=NH28887881881!8828788C8!88!28778288G822 ‹X ^ithat more.88T8 8}2 ‹џL^i electronically available should be included on the relevant reading lists. 881!8828181888828888888288787878!88187!8888722ƒ2 ўXP^iPart of this was consequent upon the inadequate supply of relevant books in the C8!782G8228817788878877887886887287818!8818888821888‹2 q XU^ilibrary, particularly for the earlier selection of first essay questions. During the 8!8!188!288!18!8878!8!2882787!2822817882882G8!8788"2 ф X^idiscussion of t822822887h2 ф в>^ihe pros and cons of staggered deadlines for survey courses it 888!828881882728778!8888788828!28!181388!282‘2 W XY^iemerged that the first deadline for European History I actually coincided with the first 8T8!7878788!28878888!C8!78878H28!1828812882888G878!2&2 Ъ X^ifor BHI this year.8!CH82188! 2 Ъ A^i 6 2 = X^i 6-:2 А X^iResponses to particular issues.H88===887!==8'!8<8'78=78 2 А ;^i 7- 2 # X^i 6-D2 – X&^iAppraisal of advice on writing essays:F>='888=!8=688==P&!==878958"- 2 – r ^i the material 78T88!8.2 – Д ^iin the course book was 878278!288882G82ƒ2 XP^irecommended by students, suggesting greater emphasis being placed on holding on !828ST7887881277882187782877!888!8S87822888787288787888787‹2 | XU^ito the copy and paying closer attention to it. General guidance within tutorials was 8782781888881872828!888888N888!87878827G8888!82G82q2 я XD^ifavoured but this was followed by enthusiasm for detailed feedback f8188!887882G8288G88818888282S8!8788778878222 я ) ^irom tutors. !8T88!2}2 bXL^iSome credit was given to broad, overall feedback given communally; this was C8S82!88G82718888!788818!88787822718828TS878182G82;2 еX ^iregarded as complementary to one!878!8888217T87T788!18878 2 еh^i-!2 е‰^ito8 2 ен^i-!L2 еў+^ione feedback from tutors. The specifics of 7888788822 8S88!2>772882227…2 HXQ^iaccuracy were valued but this was placed alongside an enthusiasm for suggestions w8228!821G8!8188888882G82882878787288888888281T8!2877828822 ЛX^iin terms88!T1}2 ЛМL^i of general delivery, structure, balance between narrative and analysis and 77788!87818"12!828!878881887G88888!!818778878122888z2 .XJ^iso forth. One request for making available (anonymous) previous essays as 288!7N78!878818!T8287818888!78881T782!8!8188272281282‚2 ЁXO^iexamples available to students starting out was greeted with general approval. 818T882818888828878228!8788H827!8887G87888!7888!81842 X^iThose students who receivedo>7828287882G88!728188V2 m2^i the mark sheet with the comments on their essays 88T8!21887G88827TS8818888!822812…2 ‡XQ^isaid that they valued the specifics and several students remarked on its absence w2887888118888882782228782818 8287881!8S8!2887827828818‹2 њXU^iwith regret. One option which was suggested was the possibility of talking to tutors G8!87!8N888787G828G8228878288G828888228178287878!2G2 mX(^iindividually about essays, presumably du881888188888217128!828T78188O2 mr -^iring the process of writing it, for guidance.!87888!828227G!878!7887828 2 mЎ^i 5 2 рX^i 6-.2 SX^iAppraisal of tutorials:F>='888=!!=!='87"-2 Sb ^i the semi8827T 2 Sј^i-!M2 S,^idetached nature of the relationship between 8782788878!8778!888828788G888Ž2 ЦXW^itutorials and lectures was appreciated, partly because the effort to pack a discussion 88!82788828!82G82878!8288888!188278288878!87822882282288O2 9X-^iof three lectures each week into 50 minutes w78!78828!827828G8828887T8882G@2 9D #^ias seen as unproductive and partly l82288882888 88811888878!1z2 ЌXJ^ibecause it enabled tutors to devote time to matters about which they were 882782888788788!2878188T88S88!27878G828771G8!8Œ2 XV^ienthusiastic, generally seen as a positive element. In addition, it was observed that 887828227878!8128888278821887T87878878G828828!18888g2 ’X=^itutorials that were less structured by an external plan allow 88!8288G8!88222!828!878188818!7888788G12 ’| ^ied space for students to e88288188!2878828‘2 XY^iask questions, voice difficulties indirectly related to the specific topic of the day. A 822788288118288188288!811!888887827822782778781Cˆ2 xXS^icouple of students voiced reservations in that there was a potential for a lack of a28887718788218188!828!1888287888!8G828888888!88227d2 ыX;^ifocus. When this was explored in greater depth, the difficuo8282b77882G828188!8887!888!878887828.2 ыb ^ilty which needed to be 1G828887887788ˆ2 ^XS^iaddressed was internal: that it would be appreciated if students were given a more a888!82188G8288!7788G88878878 82878288782G8!871888T8!7…2 бXQ^iclear sense of what was to follow week by week, primarily to an awareness of the e288!288187G88G82888GG88281G9828!S8!18888G7!88822778s2 DXE^inext week’s topic, to provide reading lists or material or a preparat881G882288278 8188!88887228!T88!88!88!878!8)2 DП ^iory exercise rather 7!1918!228!888!|2 ЗXK^ithan having to hit the ground running. One student suggested exploring the 8878818788877!8888 88887M8817888287782888188!8788-ii^^hh]]gg\\ff[[eeZZddYYccXXbbWWaaVV ` `U U  _ _T T  ^ ^S S  ] ]R R  \ \Q Q [[PPZZOOYYNNXXMMWWLLўџеЭеœ.“—+,љЎ0< hp˜ Ј АИРШ а фUniversity of Edinburgh$ щи ABritish History I Staff/Student Liaison Meeting 18 November 2010 Title ўџџџўџџџ !"#$%ўџџџ'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@AўџџџCDEFGHIўџџџ§џџџLўџџџўџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџRoot Entryџџџџџџџџ РFрђ€ьч‡ЫN€Data џџџџџџџџџџџџ1TableџџџџWordDocumentџџџџ;&SummaryInformation(џџџџџџџџџџџџ&Ь7DocumentSummaryInformation8џџџџџџџџBCompObjџџџџџџџџџџџџqџџџџџџџџџџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџўџ џџџџ РFMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8є9Вq