1. Subject Benchmark Statement
Computing
2007

2. Background
Revised version of the original statement which was published in 2000
Revision process overseen by QAA as part of the periodic review of all subject benchmark statements published in 2000
Involved full consultation with wider academic community and stakeholder groups

3. Review Group Lawrence Brooks, Brunel University
Graham Gough, University of Manchester
Alastair Irons, University of Northumbria
Gerry McAllister, University of Ulster
Andrew McGettrick, University of Strathclyde
Keith Mander, University of Kent

4. A Comparison 2000: some 2 400 computing programmes of study on offer
2006, April:
3 344 programmes in computing, plus
394 in software, plus
1 434 on information, plus
860 on multimedia
First meeting of the review team was May Not asll these courses necessarily fasll under Computing but the trend is clear.

5. Findings Original proved robust Changes are largely a result of
some re-organisation of material
an updating of content, e.g. body of knowledge
Levels now called threshold, typical and there is provision for excellence
Concept of computational thinking included
In the original we had been told just threshold, but we inserted two medial level, and also included mention of excellence. Now there was a requirement for what we have done which is gratifying.

6. Consultation process
Review team asked the community through the HEA (Computing) in Ulster for help and advice on updating the body of knowledge
QAA itself carried out the main review
All comments received a response which is lodged on the QAA web site
Information Systems community needs addressed
So thanks to those who responded

7. Web site address

8. On Masters Benchmarking
Background is that we have produced and agreed a document which is used by the community
We have now been asked: do we wish to have this go through the formal processes with QAA?
In terms of benchmarking individual disciplines at M level, we will remain responsive to requests. We would be happy to re-examine the former proposal to benchmark Computing at M level against the original thoughts of the Steering Group if the subject community still feels the case for an M level statement is clear. I wasn't, as you know, with the Agency at the time but would be happy to re-surrect the files and see whether we might identify a way forward should the subject community wish to pursue this.