Subject Benchmark Statement: Computing

Subject Benchmark

Statement

Computing

March 2022

Contents

About this Statement ...........................................................................................................1

How can I use this document? .................................................................................................. 1

Relationship to legislation and regulation .................................................................................. 1

Additional sector reference points ............................................................................................. 2

1 Context and purposes of a Computing degree..................................................3

Context ....................................................................................................................................... 3

Purposes of a Computing degree .............................................................................................. 3

Characteristics of a Computing degree ..................................................................................... 3

Equality, diversity and inclusion................................................................................................. 4

Sustainability .............................................................................................................................. 6

Entrepreneurship and enterprise education .............................................................................. 7

2 Distinctive features of a Computing degree .................................................... 11

Design ...................................................................................................................................... 11

Accessibility.............................................................................................................................. 12

Progression .............................................................................................................................. 12

Flexibility................................................................................................................................... 13

Partnership ............................................................................................................................... 13

Monitoring and review .............................................................................................................. 13

3 Content, structure and delivery .......................................................................... 15

Content ..................................................................................................................................... 15

Teaching and learning ............................................................................................................. 15

Assessment.............................................................................................................................. 17

4 Benchmark standards............................................................................................ 19

Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 19

Undergraduate standards: threshold, typical and excellent descriptors ................................. 19

Postgraduate degrees.............................................................................................................. 22

Integrated undergraduate master's degrees ........................................................................... 24

5 List of references and further resources .......................................................... 25

6 Membership of the Advisory Groups for the Subject Benchmark

Statement for Computing................................................................................................. 26

Appendix 1 - Mapping and audit templates ................................................................ 29

Appendix 2 - Examples of ESD approaches ............................................................... 30

Appendix 3 - Foundations of computer science courses ....................................... 33

About this Statement

This document is a QAA Subject Benchmark Statement for Computing that defines what can

be expected of a graduate in the subject, in terms of what they might know, do and

understand at the end of their studies. Subject Benchmark Statements also describe the

nature and characteristics of awards in a particular subject or area. Subject Benchmark

Statements are published in QAA's capacity as a membership organisation on behalf of the

higher education sector. A summary of the Statement is also available on the QAA website.

Key changes from the previous Subject Benchmark Statement include:

• a revised structure for the Statement which includes the introduction of

cross-cutting themes of:

- equality, diversity and inclusion

- education for sustainable development

• employability, entrepreneurship and enterprise education

• a comprehensive review updating the context and purposes of Computing, including

course design and content in order to inform and underpin the revised benchmark

standards

• the new Statement covers bachelor's, integrated master's and postgraduate taught

master's degrees in a single unifying Statement.

How can I use this document?

Subject Benchmark Statements are often used by higher education providers in the design

and development of new courses in the relevant subject, as they provide a framework for

specifying intended learning outcomes in an academic or vocational discipline. They are also

used as a reference point when reviewing or revalidating degree courses. They may be used

by external examiners in considering whether the design of a course and the threshold

standards of achievement are comparable with other higher education providers. They also

provide professional, statutory and regulatory bodies (PSRBs) with the academic standards

expected of students.

Subject Benchmark Statements provide general guidance for articulating the learning

outcomes associated with a course but are not intended to represent a national curriculum in

a subject or to prescribe set approaches to teaching, learning or assessment. Instead, they

allow for flexibility and innovation in course design within a framework agreed by the subject

community.

You may want to read this document if you are:

• involved in the design, delivery and review of courses in Computing

• a prospective student thinking about undertaking a course in Computing

• an employer, to find out about the knowledge and skills generally expected of

Computing graduates.

Relationship to legislation and regulation

The responsibility for academic standards lies with the higher education provider who

awards the degree. Higher education providers are responsible for meeting the requirements

of legislation and any other regulatory requirements placed upon them by their relevant

funding and regulatory bodies. This Statement does not interpret legislation, nor does it

incorporate statutory or regulatory requirements.

The regulatory status of the Statement will differ with regard to the educational jurisdictions

of the UK. In England, Subject Benchmark Statements are not sector-recognised standards

as set out under the Office for Students' regulatory framework

. However, they are specified

as a key reference point, as appropriate, for academic standards in Wales under Quality

Assessment Framework for Wales and in Scotland as part of the Quality Enhancement

Framework. Subject Benchmark Statements are part of the current quality requirements in

Northern Ireland. Because the Statement describes outcomes and attributes expected at the

threshold standard of achievement in a UK-wide context, many higher education providers

will use them as an enhancement tool for course design and approval, and for subsequent

monitoring and review, in addition to helping demonstrate the security of academic

standards.

Additional sector reference points

Higher education providers are likely to consider other reference points in addition to this

Statement in designing, delivering and reviewing courses. These may include requirements

set out by PSRBs and industry or employer expectations. QAA has also published

Advice

and Guidance to support the Quality Code which will be helpful when using this Statement,

for example, in course design, learning and teaching, external expertise and monitoring and

evaluation.

Explanations of unfamiliar terms used in this Subject Benchmark Statement can be found in

QAA's Glossary. Sources of information about other requirements and examples of guidance

and good practice are signposted within the Statement where appropriate.

1 Context and purposes of a Computing degree

Context

1.1 This Subject Benchmark Statement refers to courses of study in Computing,

including:

• bachelor's degrees with honours

• integrated undergraduate master's degrees

• postgraduate degrees that are generalist in nature

• postgraduate degrees that are specialist in nature

• courses designed to be studied in part-time mode at both undergraduate and

postgraduate levels

• undergraduate and postgraduate degree apprenticeships.

1.2 This version represents a content review and a collation of previous Subject

Benchmark Statements that had separate documents for bachelor's, integrated

undergraduate master's and postgraduate taught master's courses of study. It has been

produced by a group of subject specialists drawn from, and acting on behalf of, the subject

community. The Statement makes reference to the Association of Computer Machinery's

(ACM) and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers' (IEEE) Computing Curricula

2020 as a source for guidance on detailed curriculum content.

1.3 It also provides a reference point for multidisciplinary courses that provide a joint

programme with a substantial core of computing, for example, business and computing and

data science.

Purposes of a Computing degree

1.4 The reasons for studying computing are as diverse as its domains of application.

Some students are attracted by the depth and intellectual richness of the theory, others by

the possibility of engineering large and complex systems. Many study computing for

vocational reasons, or because it gives them the opportunity to explore creative and dynamic

technologies. Many also study to improve their employment prospects in a rapidly evolving

global digital skills economy. Whatever the perspective, computing can claim characteristics

that, while present in other disciplines, are rarely present in such quantities and

combinations. Particular emphasis has been placed within this Subject Benchmark

Statement on meeting the needs of this rapidly evolving global digital skills economy through

providing more equitable processes for learning, and subsequently earning, and, in so doing,

addressing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, in particular 4, 5 and 8,

which emphasise the need for inclusive lifelong learning, gender equality and sustainable

economic growth, respectively.

Characteristics of a Computing degree

1.5 Computing is concerned with the understanding, design and exploitation of

computation and computer technologies. It is a discipline that:

• blends elegant theories (including those derived from a range of other disciplines

such as mathematics, engineering, psychology, graphical design or well-founded

experimental insight) with the solution of immediate practical problems

• underpins the development of both small and large-scale systems that are secure,

reliable, usable and that support organisational goals

• helps individuals in their everyday lives and realise their career aspirations

• is pervasive, ubiquitous and diversely applied to a range of applications, and

important components are often invisible to the naked eye.

1.6 Computing promotes innovation and creativity. It requires a disciplined approach to

problem solving. It approaches design and development through selection from alternative

possibilities justified by carefully crafted arguments. It controls complexity first through

abstraction and simplification, and then by the integration of components. Above all, it is a

product of human ingenuity and provides major intellectual challenges, yet this limits neither

the scope of computing nor the complexity of the application domains addressed.

1.7 Computing as a discipline is attractive to innovation, and this can equally arise from

the foundational intellectual areas, for example algorithmics and cryptography, as from

technology-driven opportunities.

1.8 It is hardly surprising that the diversity of computing is reflected in the varied titles

and curricula that higher education providers have given to their computing-related degree

courses. While this Statement aims to capture the nature of computing as a discipline,

individual higher education providers may need to draw on a wider range of materials and

resources, including ethics and data regulation or other Subject Benchmark Statements, to

capture fully the specific character of their particular degree courses.

1.9 Computing degrees will continue to evolve in response to developments in the

subject area and to reflect changes in the school curriculum. This Statement therefore

concentrates on general graduate outcomes and does not specify a core computing

curriculum.

1.10 Computing degrees often integrate a period of time working within a company or

similar organisation, as an intern or placement student. Placements offer the opportunity for

students to apply and validate their learning and skills in the context of the world of

employment and to provide early exposure to the development of professional competence

as enshrined within the skills expressed in the particular course of study.

Equality, diversity and inclusion

1.11 The pervasiveness of the computing discipline can enable a curriculum which is

relevant and authentic, relates to real and current challenges, and able to promote greater

social justice and equity. The curriculum should also speak to and be valued by every

student, while addressing issues that are important to them. Culturally responsive computing

approaches that recognise and value students' cultures can bring about ways for students to

reflect and engage with issues of representation, exclusion, disadvantage and structurally

embedded advantage. The curriculum should engage students in meaningful, culturally-

contexed practical tasks in a welcoming and collaborative environment, as well as ensuring

that technological solutions do not emerge with unintentional bias and limited insight into the

diversity of the people who will develop and use them.

1.12 Curricula should therefore actively represent all students, acknowledging and

removing existing biases, and enabling and supporting all students equally. For example,

traditionally, the computer science field has suffered from gender imbalance, in part as a

result of structurally genderised terminology, approaches to teaching and learning and the

historical context in which the subject has developed.

1.13 Students can be significantly impacted by the way courses are structured, delivered

and assessed. Understanding these potential impacts and how best to address them,

through making reasonable adjustments, is key to providing a course that meets the needs

of all students. For example, providing accessible content ahead of learning activities,

supporting all students with both individual and group learning activities, ensuring

personalised learning support is effectively combined with learning activities and providing

different options for how learners can engage with the learning content all help to address

such impacts.

1.14 The statements below provide an auditable list of equitable practices and processes

by which greater equality and accessibility can be achieved. Course and module content and

delivery may be mapped to these statements (Appendix 1), along with supporting examples

and evidence, to demonstrate the processes by which greater equality, diversity and

inclusion can be achieved.

Courses of study and their providers could consider:

• how to demonstrate due regard for unlawful and/or inappropriate conduct with

consideration given to people with a protected characteristic (age, disability, gender

reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual

orientation)

• means for mitigating disadvantages suffered by people with a protected

characteristic where these are different from the needs of other people, enable

people within protected groups to take part in activities where their participation is

disproportionately low and foster good relations between people who share a

protected characteristic and those who do not

• equitable measures that discernibly address how teaching, learning and

assessment promotes equality in relation to legislative protected characteristics,

including special educational needs, age, disability (overt and hidden), gender

reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual

orientation as well as being sensitive to and promoting a curriculum that is broadly

informed

• providing a variety of perspectives on computing topics and ensuring that case

studies used as exemplars or as assessments are drawn from a diverse range,

highlighting global perspectives, featuring diverse cultures and communities,

showcasing the historical and cultural integration of computing and the diverse

people who do computing

• providing inclusive opportunities for collaborative and team-based problem-solving

where students can share, and possibly use as drivers for problem-solving, their

own experiences and perspectives, without judgement or prejudice

• the development of the wider skills and behaviours for professional communication,

collaborative working and reflective practice that are respectful, accessible and

inclusive of all, at both the intercultural and intracultural; that is, between cultures

and within a culture

• providing opportunities to involve students as co-creators of the curriculum to

ensure that the vocabulary of computing addresses non-inclusive language that can

be seen as confronting by under-represented groups

• providing inclusive and engaging teaching, learning, assessment and feedback

strategies to support all students' development, success and employability, while

connecting with their identities, experiences and cultural capital

• providing opportunities to democratise the physical and virtual learning spaces so

that they are equally accessible and inclusive for all students

• the strategies required to mitigate or remove biases at each stage of the system life

cycle, or other approaches adopted in the context of the curriculum being delivered,

including developing reflective practice on own biases

• addressing the differential and social impact of technology in relation to people who

share a protected characteristic and those who do not, paying attention to

intersectionality and lack of representation

• acknowledging and addressing how divisions and hierarchies of colonial value are

replicated and reinforced within the computing subject. For more information,

please see Decolonising of curriculum

• highlighting methods of ethically aligned participatory design and human-centred

computing that embed all stakeholders in the process

• demonstrating areas in software engineering and application development that

require a professional and reflective approach to addressing bias and lack of

diversity in data and design of computing solutions, systems and protocols.

Sustainability

1.15 Computing courses should address the sustainable development agenda through

highlighting key economic, social and environmental issues that the discipline influences,

whether positively or negatively. Courses should enable students to develop core personal

and professional competencies to address the key societal challenges highlighted by the

United Nations Sustainable Development Goals for 2030 in their future working lives. The

Education for Sustainable Development Guidance

(QAA and Advance HE, 2021) outlines

pedagogic approaches for implementation in UK higher education institutions.

1.16 Across the Computing curriculum, we should be considering the broad definition of

sustainable development, which encompasses economic and social sustainable

development as well as environmental, and thinking about how the material that we teach

links to these goals. There will be places where environmental sustainability can be

discussed, for example, the resource consumption of massive data centres used for cloud

computing, and more generally, the environmental costs of both building hardware to

support computing and disposing of electronic waste. Sustainable development also links

with equality, diversity and inclusion; therefore, issues around social justice and economic

prosperity can also be brought into the discussion in many areas of computing, alongside

developing curricula that are global in outlook and that support inclusive lifelong learning and

economic prosperity for all.

1.17 There are 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals, but there are close relationships

between them, and identifying one goal that is relevant is likely to lead to more. This Subject

Benchmark Statement does not attempt to prescribe exactly which goals should be

discussed in a Computing degree course, because computing is such a diverse field. The

introduction of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) is still emerging within the

computing discipline, with providers exploring the effectiveness of alternative approaches,

with some specific examples of practice being presented in Appendix 2. These are intended

to be illustrative rather than prescriptive; consider how these ideas would apply to the

particular focus of a specific Computing degree. In broad terms, commonly adopted

approaches include:

• specific modules which focus directly upon Sustainability or closely related areas

such as green IT

• embedding Sustainability as a key theme in appropriate areas such as professional

issues related delivery

• addressing Sustainability in an integral manner as cross-curricula concern with

relevant issues being flagged as their relevance emerges, such as within

requirements for engineering, cloud computing, machine learning, green IT as

relates to infrastructure

• addressing Sustainability indirectly via the use of case studies/projects that address

other aspects of the curricula but in doing so cover education for sustainable

development.

1.18 Irrespective of the approach adopted, the intention is that Computing graduates

should have an appreciation of domain-relevant issues related to sustainable development

and the emergent manner by which these issues might be addressed.

Entrepreneurship and enterprise education

In this context, entrepreneurship and enterprise education are interpreted as referring to

employability in its widest context.

1.19 Preparing computing students to move successfully from education into

employment is an essential part of a degree course. While there are other departments

within institutions that will support students in taking the next steps in their career together

with a personal responsibility for the student themselves to take ownership, it is imperative

that the development of employability skills is embedded into Computing courses, with the

following section acting as a guide. Entrepreneurship and enterprise education are important

factors to consider in relation to employability skills because their specific inclusion in degree

curricula contributes to raising the employability levels of Computing graduates and the

section below should be read in conjunction with

Enterprise and Entrepreneurship

Education: Guidance for UK Higher Education Providers (QAA, 2018).

Personal, professional and academic skills

Generic skills

• Ability to work with professional and behavioural integrity.

• Awareness of the legal and ethical factors and principles in the professional

environment of computing.

• Awareness of sustainability issues related to the computing discipline/profession.

• Demonstrable understanding of computing as a global profession.

• Responsible use and application of social media in a professional environment. This

to include professional online communication, email etiquette and the development

of an online presence.

• Critical reflection skills and the ability to communicate effectively in writing, verbally

and electronically.

• Apply a high standard of numeracy and literacy.

• Ability to interact with others in a professional and respectful way.

• Understand and demonstrate respect for the values of equality and diversity across

a range of different industries and business sectors within the broad computing

professional workplace (see Equality, diversity and inclusion on page 4).

• Understand the role of a leader in setting directions and taking responsibility for

actions and decisions.

• Communicate with confidence at face-to-face and virtual meetings.

Agile working

• Ability to work with agility and flexibility in response to changing situations

and priorities.

• Ability to interpret data and information within both academic and professional

contexts in a timely way.

• Ability to recognise and make best use of the skills and knowledge of individuals

to collaborate.

• Ability to identify problems and desired outcomes and negotiate with colleagues to

achieve mutually acceptable solutions.

Remote working

• Ability to work unsupervised, plan effectively and meet deadlines.

• Ability to act confidently on one's own initiative.

Resilience

• Build social capital and apply professional networking skills.

• Maintain an up-to-date critical understanding of the developments, challenges and

opportunities of the professional environment, both nationally and globally.

• The ability to succinctly present rational and reasoned arguments that address a

given problem or opportunity, to a range of audiences (orally, electronically or

in writing).

Entrepreneurship and enterprise education

• Active engagement in continuous professional development.

• Contribute to the development of the profession and ability to apply an enterprising

and challenging approach.

• The ability to locate and retrieve relevant ideas and ensure that these can be

effectively communicated in a variety of formats to a variety of audiences.

• Recognise factors in environmental and societal contexts which present

opportunities and challenges for computing systems across a range of human

activities.

Subject-specific skills in computing (common core)

• The subject-specific computing knowledge and skills specified elsewhere in this

Subject Benchmark Statement will form the basis of the body of knowledge that

an employer could reasonably expect a Computing graduate to be able to use

and apply.

• Graduates should be able to link subject knowledge to business and industry by

discussing examples and cases studies of how their subject knowledge of

computing can be used by organisations.

• Application of computing knowledge and computational thinking to solve complex

problems to the benefit and enhancement of the organisation or enterprise that the

graduate will be working in.

• Ability to continuously plan and record self-learning and development in core

computing skills and applications of technology as the foundation for lifelong

learning and continuous professional development.

Developing employability skills through interdisciplinary thinking

• Computing is widely taught in joint and interdisciplinary courses, for example,

management information systems, health informatics, computer science with

economics, and scientific computing, for which it may be appropriate to draw on

several Subject Benchmark Statements.

• Interdisciplinary teamwork and creative thinking are important employability skills for

computing students. Interdisciplinary thinking promotes innovation, open-

mindedness and creativity. Due to the interdisciplinary nature of computing,

graduates should be able to apply computer science, data science and digital

technology to problem-solving in other disciplines.

• Interdisciplinary project-based or problem-based learning in Computing courses

could be used to encourage students to explore content beyond computing

subjects, to draw insights from diverse disciplines and to apply them to the area of

focus to solve problems by integrating knowledge and experience which come from

computing and other disciplines.

Career prospects and employers' perspective

Career prospects

• There is a huge range of different employment pathways open to graduates of

computing across organisation types: public and private sector, start-ups, scale-

ups, small to large enterprises; and role discipline: software engineer, cybersecurity,

data ethics; the list continues to grow. Graduates of computing should build an

understanding of potential employment pathways, their differing skills requirements

together with a self-awareness of personal skillsets, covering both technical and

more generic employability skills and how to match these to career aspirations.

• Graduates should have the ability to communicate effectively how study and

experience provides evidence of personal strengths and skills and how these can

be effectively articulated to prospective employers, including the use of social media

platforms to support professional profile development.

• Careers within computing have a high requirement for continuing professional

development (CPD) and courses should encourage students to explore how to

access CPD and how to build this into future career planning.

• Course planning and development should include working with employers wherever

possible, to identify co-curricular activities such as bootcamps, hackathons, master

classes and the development of authentic assessment opportunities.

Employers' perspective

• Courses should encourage students to explore the potential role of digital

technologies within the workplace and how to apply appropriate digital technologies,

techniques and principles to advance digital capabilities.

• Employers will expect graduates to be able to demonstrate core skills required to

apply and advance digital technologies within the workplace and the development

of these skills should be included within courses.

• Collaboration and teamwork: capability to work with other people, from a range of

cultures, to achieve common goals, for example through group work, group projects

and group presentations.

• Self-management: a readiness to accept responsibility and flexibility, to be resilient,

self-starting and appropriately assertive, to plan, organise and manage time.

• Self-reflection: self-analysis and an awareness/sensitivity to diversity in terms of

people and cultures, showing emotional intelligence and empathy.

• Communication and listening: including the ability to produce clear, structured

communications using a variety of media.

• Capability advancement: including networking with peers and horizon scanning to

identify opportunities to advance digital capabilities and create a better future.

2 Distinctive features of a Computing degree

Design

2.1 The term computing applies to an increasingly diverse set of degree courses, all

based on the foundations of computer science. This Statement identifies computer science,

computer engineering, software engineering, information technology, information systems,

cybersecurity and data science as discipline areas and outlines the content covered by

these (Appendix 3). A Computing degree may include subject matter from more than one

discipline area.

2.2 This Statement does not specify a syllabus or include a body of knowledge. ACM, in

conjunction with IEEE and other professional societies, maintain and regularly update

curricula in several discipline areas (Appendix 3). These documents should be used to

inform course design and curriculum content.

2.3 Many higher education providers deliver degrees focused on specific aspects of

computing, for example computer networking, games, multimedia, artificial intelligence and

health informatics. These courses count as computing if their content is informed by one or

more of the discipline areas listed above. The mere fact that computers are deployed to

solve problems in a certain area does not itself make that area fall within the field of

computing.

2.4 Additionally, computing is widely taught in joint and interdisciplinary courses for

which it may be appropriate to draw on a number of Subject Benchmark Statements. This

Statement is the reference point for the computing component of such courses.

2.5 The title of a course cannot describe the whole of its content. However, course titles

are not divorced from graduate knowledge, skills and abilities. There are natural overlaps

between the different identified discipline areas and course specifications indicate careers

the course's graduates would be expected to proceed into. For example, a degree in

software engineering could include aspects of computer science, for example, formal

methods; and information technology, for example, user advocacy. However, the title

and course specification of the degree references the curriculum from the dominant

discipline area.

2.6 The following are fundamental requirements associated with all degree courses in

Computing:

• the topic and learning outcomes are identified and defined clearly, and their

relationship to the subject of computing and its applications is carefully captured in

the title of the award

• courses are carefully designed to accommodate students who enter with a wide

range of accepted entrance qualifications

• the relevant theoretical underpinnings, which may or may not be mathematical in

nature, are identified and should result in emphasis on those fundamental aspects

of a subject which do not change in the context of rapid technological development

• the curriculum demonstrates an integration between theory and practice as well as

the planned development of a set of attitudes and an appreciation of a range of

applications and their impact on users

• there is an appropriate integration between a set of classes that demonstrates

cohesion in content and a planned approach to the topic of the course

• a major component is a substantial individual activity, or team activity that provides

substantial individual responsibility, that requires an awareness of material from

across the individual modules and which provides opportunities for students to

demonstrate a range of abilities and achievements

• all undergraduate and master's degree courses will meet the outcomes of the

qualification descriptors identified in

The Frameworks for Higher Education

Qualifications of UK Degree-Awarding Bodies.

Accessibility

2.7 In any discussion of accessibility in computing education, it is important to

recognise the unique responsibility that computing as a subject has to people with

disabilities. Technology can be transformational: tasks that previously were difficult or

impossible for some people can be made routine with the use of technology. However,

technology can also cause barriers to access, and care should be taken to ensure

technology acts to enable people rather than disable them.

2.8 As such, when we discuss accessibility in respect of computing education it must

encompass both the teaching and practice of universal access, following standards and

ensuring compatibility with assistive technologies. In terms of curricula, accessibility should

be treated as a standard part of computing. For example, where software development

lifecycles are taught, accessibility should be embedded as a concern along with other

concerns, such as the testing of software quality.

2.9 In terms of practice, curricula should be designed with accessibility in mind, meeting

statutory requirements as a minimum. Creating educational environments with accessibility

as a primary concern can enable students to study computing when without such

consideration, they would be unable to do so. For example, if a course requires students

to regularly attend a physical location on campus, this may place barriers in the way of

some students.

Progression

2.10 Over the course of a degree with honours (FHEQ Level 6; FQHEIS Level 10) a

Computing student will progress from one year of study to the next, in line with the

regulations and processes for each institution. However, it is expected that each year would

see the attainment of certain levels of knowledge, expertise and experience which builds

towards the final achievement of meeting all of the threshold-level subject-specific and

generic skills listed in this Statement. Upon graduation from an undergraduate degree, it

would be expected that a student who had achieved a second-class degree or higher would

be capable of, and equipped for, undertaking postgraduate study in computing or an

associated discipline.

2.11 Joint honours undergraduates will achieve elements of the specific and generic

skills for the subject but will add others according to the subjects covered in a joint

programme.

2.12 Integrated undergraduate master's degrees (FHEQ Level 7; FQHEIS Level 11) are

available in the UK and typically comprise a four-year full-time course or a part-time course

of not less than five and not more than eight academic years. Students exiting earlier may be

eligible for a Certificate of Higher Education, a Diploma of Higher Education or an honours

degree depending upon the years of study completed to a satisfactory standard. Similarly, in

a standard three-year undergraduate honours degree qualification, students may also exit

earlier with a Certificate or Diploma depending upon their achievements. Scottish bachelor's

degrees with honours are typically designed to include four years of study, which relates to

the structure of Scottish primary and secondary education.

Flexibility

2.13 Flexible educational approaches enable learners to adapt their education to their

situational and contextual individual needs and constraints. Flexible educational approaches

may also play a key role in increasing access into further and higher education and social

mobility. For example, such approaches could provide scope for learners to select

educational opportunities that are better suited to their current level of proficiency and

interests.

2.14 To this end, there may need to be:

• flexible delivery modes, including but not limited to campus-based, online distance

learning, block release and hybrid (campus-based and online)

• flexible study patterns in terms of intensity of study and start dates

• flexible approaches to assessment tasks that enable learners to demonstrate

different competencies

• greater focus on assessment that is authentic to learners; this may include project-

based tasks and teamwork, while maintaining academic rigour and theoretical

foundations

• more flexible approaches to credits, for example the integration of micro-credentials

with traditional modular credits

• flexible approaches to recruitment processes that recognise prior learning

(accreditation of prior certificated learning, APCL) and/or work experience in the

computing field (accreditation of prior experiential learning, APEL)

• designing courses as online first may be useful in reducing and avoiding barriers to

flexible approaches

• sufficiently flexible processes to develop and review courses of study so that course

teams are able to dynamically address the needs of learners, industry and society.

Partnership

2.15 Many degree courses provide opportunities for work-based learning such as

apprenticeships

, placements and live work-based projects. Other courses may offer

opportunities for study abroad. These opportunities are usually achieved through the higher

education provider working in partnership with other external organisations.

2.16 Further advice and guidance can be found on Partnerships and

Work-based

Learning.

2.17 Computing courses can benefit from other collaborations with external

organisations in activities such as curriculum design, talks, workshops, projects and visits.

An effective external/industry advisory board can help ensure courses are relevant to the

needs of the computing sector and advise on the development of employability skills.

Monitoring and review

2.18 A major feature of academic quality assurance and enhancement at a higher

education institution is having in place monitoring and regular review processes for the

courses it delivers. Degree-awarding bodies routinely collect and analyse information and

undertake periodic course review according to their own needs. They will draw on a range of

external reference points, including this Statement, to ensure that their provision aligns with

sector norms. Monitoring and evaluation is a periodic assessment of a course, conducted

internally or by external independent evaluators. Evaluation uses information from current

and historic monitoring to develop an understanding of student achievement and inform

future course planning. A combination of continuous and retrospective monitoring practices

is vital for the effective monitoring and review of courses of study.

2.19 Externality is an essential component of the quality assurance system in the UK.

Higher education providers will use external reviewers as part of periodic review to gain an

external perspective on any proposed changes and ensure threshold standards are

achieved and content is appropriate for the subject.

2.20 External examination currently in use across the UK higher education sector also

helps to ensure consistency in the way academic standards are secured by degree-awarding

bodies. Typically, external examiners will be asked to comment on the types, principles and

purposes of assessments being offered to students. They will consider the types of modules

on offer to students, the outcomes of a cohort and how these compare to similar provision

offered within the UK. External examiners produce a report each year and make

recommendations for changes to modules and assessments (where appropriate). Subject

Benchmark Statements, such as this one, can play an important role in supporting external

examiners in advising on whether threshold standards are being met in a specific subject

area.

2.21 Courses with professional and vocational outcomes may also require evaluation

and accreditation from professional and regulatory bodies. These are usually done through a

combination of site visits and desk-based reviews.

2.22 Additionally, courses should also consider the inclusion of learners in their

monitoring and review processes as part of their student-staff partnership work.

3 Content, structure and delivery

Content

3.1 Computing is any purposeful activity using, exploiting or creating computing

equipment and services. As equipment and services rapidly change there is an increasing

need to shift from experience and end qualification-based recruitment processes to more

fluid, talent-based approaches where badges, micro-credentials, skills-based hiring and

lifelong learning play an increasingly important role in enabling global learner-earners to

move more seamlessly between education and employment.

3.2 Within this context, undergraduate and postgraduate degrees will continue to

represent important milestones for learners entering the workforce, but they are also

expected to play a more important role in reskilling the workforce as economic requirements

change. As more granular micro-credentialing plays an increasing role in meeting employer

needs there is also an increasing emphasis on both undergraduate and postgraduate

degrees continuing to meet the needs of employers and learners as springboards into

careers, both initially and as learner-earners adapt and retrain both in the UK and overseas.

Providing content that can be added to learner-earners' existing achievements, without

duplication and unnecessary additional study, will therefore become increasingly important in

supporting an adaptive global workforce.

3.3 Traditionally, computing stakeholders have included employers, professional bodies

(representing employer expectations as well as providing aligned training), cross-sector

educational institutions and regulatory organisations. As education and employment

becomes increasingly global, international organisations such as the OECD, UNESCO,

World Bank and International Labour Organization also play an increasingly important role,

especially in defining future educational and workforce requirements. Within this context it is

important, in particular, to consider future skills requirements in the next 10 to 15 years, as

discussed, for example, in the OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030 project

, and the

increasingly important role of twenty-first century skills within employment. Both point to a

need to more clearly and effectively communicate what would traditionally be seen as non-

technical capabilities and competencies alongside technical capabilities and competencies

and to provide a global and skills-based perspective when contextualising the curriculum.

3.4 Pedagogically, educators should consider the balance between subject-specific and

transferable skills development in both curriculum and assessment, opportunities for

personalised learning and evidencing of individual capability and competency development

within courses and the balance between educational and workforce requirements as courses

are developed and maintained. The value of learning, in providing both learner-earner

agency and value to society and the economy, should be both clear and wherever possible

differentiated between learners. Problem-solving and artefact creation form core parts of the

computing discipline and enabling learners to evidence these within a curriculum in ways

they understand and can communicate with others are encouraged. The use of capstone

activity as well as teamwork is encouraged within courses.

Teaching and learning

3.5 There is an increasing emphasis on being able to recognise, record and

communicate capability and competency development and performance both within

education and employment. In the context of undergraduate and postgraduate degrees, this

highlights the increasing need, in particular, to evidence learning of computing

competencies; that is, the application of computing capabilities in applied contexts. Typically,

these contexts would be work-based, such as those traditionally provided through

apprenticeships, internships, placements and live projects with clients. However, as the

demarcation between education and employment becomes more blurred it is likely that other

forms of competency measure may play an increasing role in recognition, such as online

evaluations, role-playing scenarios and gig-economy/commissioned work.

3.6 Alongside a shift to more flexible recording and recognition of education and

employment, there is also a need for individuals to become better able to control their own

learner-earner journeys. Having agency over their personal performance requires both a

better understanding of themselves and appropriate tools and techniques to enable them to

self-regulate and to optimise their personal performance. As such, there is a greater

emphasis on educational institutions to provide opportunities for reflection, performance

monitoring, evaluation and feedback within learning to support a more personalised learning

journey. Portfolios, accommodation of non-formal and informal learning, flexible, adaptive

and personalised assessment approaches and better use of evaluative data such as careers

information and learning analytics provide opportunities to support a more fluid and

responsive learning experience.

3.7 Computing courses deploy a diverse range of teaching approaches, which is a

strength of the subject. The teaching methods employed should have the potential to firstly

deliver a range of learning that can be demonstrated through the achievement of learning

outcomes, indicating capability. They should also ensure that learners have competence in

specific areas of computing, which requires an ability to work independently in these areas.

3.8 Competence is often achieved through repeated exposure to practical coursework,

both individual and group-work. While small projects can be developmental, competence

typically requires work to be completed that is of a significant scale and/or complexity and

that is undertaken in a real or simulated work context or is addressing real world

requirements.

3.9 Teaching should encourage students to reflect, evaluate, select, justify,

communicate and be innovative in their problem-solving; and prepare them to become

adaptable independent learners throughout their lifelong learner-earner journey. Students

should be exposed to a range of tools and techniques relevant to their course, including

bespoke, open source and commercially available approaches. The diverse prior learning,

capabilities, competencies and experiences should be understood and accommodated.

Learning barriers should be minimised wherever possible to enable all learners to be as

successful as possible. Equality, diversity and inclusion within the curriculum should be

carefully considered as outlined in section 1.

3.10 Curriculum design should reflect appropriate research, scholarship and the ability to

make an informed choice as to which is the most appropriate approach to use in a specific

context, alongside current industrial and business practices. Teaching needs to be placed

within the context of the legal, social, ethical, professional, environmental and economic

factors that are relevant to computing. In addition to technical subjects such as security, the

curriculum should use an inclusive design approach and also include relevant aspects of

sustainability as well as equality, diversity and inclusion. The attitudes and values of

graduates should also be developed to enable them to thrive in a diverse and rapidly

changing subject such as computing.

3.11 To ensure students have sufficient underpinning, the early stages of undergraduate

courses will typically expose students to a broad range of computing topics, becoming more

focused in the final year. Generalist master's, where no prior subject knowledge may have

been studied, will typically focus on meeting the minimum subject knowledge required of a

Computing graduate. Generalist master's may be designed to offer a broad underpinning or

to focus on particular niche areas such as software testing. Specialist master's (and the final

year of integrated undergraduate master's) will typically be more focused on specific aspects

of the subject. In addition to increasing focus, progression through Levels should also reflect

a move from general underpinning to current research and state of the art. Further, it is

important that progression reflects increasing levels of independent learning, so students

learn how to learn for themselves, supporting their future development and enabling them to

retain currency throughout their career.

3.12 The curriculum will define the knowledge students will gain and the course learning

outcomes indicate the areas in which graduates will have knowledge competence or

capability. However, individual students are expected to have the opportunity to develop a

greater level of competence in some aspects of computing. These areas could also be linked

to specific applied learning contexts, the particular focus of their major capstone activity, or a

student's chosen pathway through optional modules on the course. Individual students could

highlight their competencies, for example, in a learning portfolio, through the achievement of

badges linked to micro-credentials, or in their curriculum vitae.

3.13 The hardware and software resources available should facilitate a practical

approach to the delivery of the course. Staff delivering Computing courses should be able to

demonstrate ongoing personal development in the subject and appropriate pedagogy. Such

activity should be supported at institutional level. Normally, staff would be qualified to a level

beyond the level they are teaching and would also have undertaken, or be undertaking, a

teaching qualification relevant to higher education.

3.14 Institutions offering integrated undergraduate specialist master's courses must be

able to articulate the legitimacy of providing education in the course topic. Although there are

other possibilities, this will often mean that the institution possesses staff who are at the

forefront of developments in the topic of the course and engaged in related advanced

scholarship.

3.15 Computing graduates need to have acquired a strong grounding in underpinning

knowledge alongside an ability to apply that knowledge to support future lifelong learning

and the development of competence in new technologies as they are developed. Typically,

students would demonstrate their ability to learn and apply a new approach or as part of the

major activity that takes place towards the end of their course.

3.16 Course delivery should incorporate opportunities for applied learning in an authentic

or simulated work context, such as industrial placements or apprenticeships. Working in

teams of several people on sizable projects can simulate the real-world environment as well

as exposing students to complexity. Projects defined in collaboration with industrial partners

or research groups can enhance student learning and stimulate and promote interest in self-

regulated learning as well as exposing students to aspects such as legal or ethical issues,

demonstrating their relevance and importance.

Assessment

3.17 Assessment for Computing courses should be varied, appropriate and engaging.

Perhaps most importantly, assessments should be authentic and tied to real-world contexts

and constraints, and also allow students to practically demonstrate the skills they have

developed.

3.18 Academic integrity is a key concept here and assessment design plays a critical

role in enabling all students to succeed to the best of their abilities. Assessment techniques

should afford students the opportunities to showcase what they can do, not just what they

can write about, while also ensuring that checkpoints are in place to ensure that only work

produced by students themselves is being assessed, for example by following the principles

in the QAA's contract cheating guidance.

3.19 Computing courses often conclude with a capstone activity, which brings together

knowledge and practical and analytical skills that learners have developed throughout the

course. This may take the form of a traditional project or end-point assessment, but other

formats can be appropriate, whether research or practice-led.

3.20 A traditional written dissertation may not be suitable for all Computing courses, so a

capstone activity may also include the production of academic papers, the development of a

professional portfolio or work on entrepreneurial activities. Such activities at master's level

should have a greater focus on drawing upon research literature.

4 Benchmark standards

Introduction

4.1 This Subject Benchmark Statement sets out the minimum threshold standards that

a student will have demonstrated when they are awarded an honours degree in Computing.

Demonstrating these standards over time will show that a student has achieved the range of

knowledge, understanding and skills expected of graduates in computing. Benchmark

standards are defined for bachelor's degrees with honours, integrated undergraduate

master's degrees, postgraduate master's degrees and degree apprenticeships in Computing.

4.2 The benchmark standards are defined relative to the appropriate FHEQ Level 6 or 7

(FQHEIS Level 10 or 11) specification and associated descriptors. As such, their application

to an individual course is necessarily contextual. As Computing degrees are often accredited

by UK professional bodies, for example through the British Computer Society, the Institute

for Apprenticeships and Technical Education, sector skills bodies or other Engineering

Council recognised accreditors, all professional competency standards will apply in many

instances.

4.3 The vast majority of students will perform significantly better than the minimum

threshold standards. Each higher education provider has its own method of determining

what appropriate evidence of this achievement will be and should refer to

Annex D: Outcome

classification descriptions for FHEQ Level 6 and FQHEIS Level 10 degrees. This Annex sets

out common descriptions of the four main degree outcome classifications for bachelor's

degrees with honours: 1st, 2:1, 2:2 and 3rd. While it is expected these benchmarks will

provide the foundation for awards, it is understood that variances may arise for reasons of

institutional autonomy or subject evolution, and that any deviation from these standards be

identified and justified.

Undergraduate standards: threshold, typical and excellent

descriptors

4.4 Three levels of attainment are defined across a range of course outcome

categories.

4.5 With regard to undergraduate courses, those graduating with a bachelor's honours

degree in Computing must demonstrate at least a threshold level of attainment across all

outcome categories. Threshold level attainment typically maps onto that associated with a

3rd class honours. The typical level descriptor defines outcomes usually associated with 2:1.

or 2:2. class honours performance. The excellent descriptor defines outcomes usually

associated with a 1st class honours. It is not expected that a 1st class honours student must

demonstrate excellent attainment in all outcome categories.

4.6 See paragraphs 4.7-4.17 for details on how the threshold, typical and excellent

attainment descriptors apply to integrated undergraduate master's degrees and

postgraduate master's degrees.

Threshold

Typical

Excellent

Subject

knowledge,

understanding

and skills

Demonstrate a

requisite

understanding of the

main body of

knowledge for their

subject

Demonstrate a sound

understanding of the

main body of

knowledge for their

subject and be able to

exercise critical

judgement in the use

of that knowledge

Demonstrate an

exceptional

understanding of the

main body of

knowledge for their

subject and be able to

exercise insightful and

critical judgement in

the use of that

knowledge. Be

creative and

innovative in the

application of the

principles covered in

the curriculum, and be

able to go beyond

what has been taught

in classes

Intellectual skills

Understand and

apply essential

concepts, principles

and practices of the

subject in the

context of well-

defined scenarios,

showing judgement

in the selection and

application of tools

and techniques

Critically analyse and

apply concepts,

principles and

practices of the

subject in the context

of loosely defined

scenarios, showing

effective judgement

and adaptability in the

selection and use of

tools and techniques

Critically analyse and

apply a wide range of

concepts, principles

and practices of the

subject in the context

of open scenarios,

showing refined

judgement and

adaptability in the

selection and use of

tools and techniques

Computational

problem-solving

Be able to

demonstrate

judgement, critical

thinking and

problem-solving

skills to solve well-

specified problems,

to create

computational

artefacts with a

degree of

independence

Be able to

demonstrate detailed

judgement, critical

thinking and problem-

solving skills to solve

both well-specified

and loosely defined

problems, to create

appropriate

computational

artefacts

Be able to

demonstrate

sophisticated

judgement, critical

thinking, research

design, and well-

developed problem-

solving skills with a

high degree of

autonomy, and to

create highly effective

computational

artefacts across

complex and

unpredictable

circumstances

Practical skills

across the

computing

lifecycle

Demonstrate the

ability to undertake

problem

identification and

analysis to

appropriately

design, develop,

test, integrate or

Demonstrate the

ability to undertake

problem identification

and analysis to

appropriately design,

develop, test,

integrate or deploy a

complex computing

Demonstrate the

ability to undertake

problem identification

and analysis to

appropriately design,

develop, test,

integrate or deploy a

highly complex

Threshold

Typical

Excellent

deploy a computing

system and any

associated artefacts;

understand the

relationship between

stages

system and any

associated artefacts;

understand the

relationship between

stages and be able to

demonstrate related

problem-solving and

evidence-informed

evaluative skills

computing system

and any associated

artefacts; deeply

understand the

relationship between

stages and be able to

demonstrate related

sophisticated

problem-solving and

evidence-informed

evaluative skills

Interpersonal and

team working

skills (see also

Entrepreneurship

and enterprise

education)

Demonstrate the

ability to work in an

effective manner,

including as a

member of a team,

making use of tools

and techniques to

appropriately

communicate,

manage tasks and

plan projects under

guidance

Demonstrate the

ability to work in a

proactive and

effective manner,

including as a

member of a team,

making good use of

tools and techniques

to successfully

communicate,

manage tasks and

plan projects with

minimum guidance

Demonstrate the

ability to work in a

highly proactive and

accomplished

manner, including as

a leading member of

a team, making

excellent use of tools

and techniques to

proficiently

communicate,

manage tasks and

plan projects with

minimum guidance

Professional

practice (see also

Equality, diversity

and inclusion,

Sustainability and

Entrepreneurship

and enterprise

education)

Identify appropriate

practices and

perform work within

a professional, legal

and ethical

framework –

including data

management and

use, security,

equality, diversity

and inclusion (EDI)

and sustainability –

in the work that they

undertake

Identify appropriate

practices and effect

principled solutions

within a professional,

legal and ethical

framework to address

core considerations –

including data

management and

use, security, equality,

diversity and inclusion

(EDI) and

sustainability – in the

work that they

undertake

Identify best-of-kind

practices and effect

highly principled

solutions within a

professional, legal

and ethical framework

to consistently

address a wide

breadth of relevant

considerations –

including data

management and

use, security, equality,

diversity and inclusion

(EDI) and

sustainability – in the

work that they

undertake

Postgraduate degrees

4.7 A broad range of postgraduate Computing degrees can be defined. With reference

to the QAA characteristics statement on master's degrees

, this includes specialised

postgraduate degrees that provide learners with an opportunity to deepen their study,

typically within a specific area. It also includes professional and practice-based postgraduate

degrees, including those that may attract entrants from a diverse range of undergraduate

qualifications.

4.8 Nonetheless, all master's degree graduates have in-depth and advanced

knowledge and understanding of their subject and/or profession, informed by current

practice, scholarship and research. This will include a critical awareness of current issues

and developments in the subject and/or profession; critical skills; knowledge of professional

responsibility, integrity and ethics; and the ability to reflect on their own progress as a

learner.

4.9 Graduates of research master's are likely to be further characterised by their ability

to study independently in the subject, and to use a range of techniques and research

methods applicable to advanced scholarship in the subject. Graduates of specialist or

advanced study master's are likely to be characterised in particular by their ability to

complete a research project in the subject, which in some subjects includes a critical review

of existing literature or other scholarly outputs. Meanwhile, graduates of professional or

practice master's are able to apply research and critical perspectives to professional

situations, both practical and theoretical, and to use a range of techniques and research

methods applicable to their professional activities.

4.10 Graduates of all types of master's degrees are equipped to enter a variety of types

of employment (either subject-specific or generalist) or to continue academic study at a

higher level, for example a doctorate (provided that they meet the necessary entry

requirements). Graduates of professional/practice master's courses in particular possess the

skills and experience necessary for some professions or areas of practice.

4.11 The broad range of postgraduate Computing degrees entails that the full range of

course outcome categories, as identified in Undergraduate standards: threshold, typical and

excellent descriptors, may not apply to all courses.

4.12 In all cases, the content of the course should align to the FHEQ Level 7/SCQF

Level 11 specification.

4.13 With reference to the descriptors outlined in Undergraduate standards: threshold,

typical and excellent descriptors, students graduating with a postgraduate degree in

Computing must demonstrate at least a threshold level of attainment across all relevant

course outcome categories. Attainment at a threshold level usually maps onto that

associated with a Pass award.

4.14 The typical level descriptor defines outcomes usually associated with the typical

threshold performance across all relevant course outcome categories. Attainment at a typical

level usually maps onto that associated with a Pass/Merit or Commendation award. The

excellent descriptor defines outcomes usually associated with the award of a Distinction. It is

not expected that such a student must demonstrate excellent attainment in all outcome

categories.

Typical

Excellent

Subject

knowledge,

understanding

and skills

Demonstrate a systematic

understanding of knowledge, as

appropriate to the area of study,

much of which is at, or informed

by, the forefront of their academic

discipline, field of study or area of

professional practice. Alongside

this, demonstrate a critical

awareness of current problems

and/or recent development within

the discipline.

Demonstrate a degree of

originality in the application of

knowledge, together with a

practical understanding of how

established investigative

techniques of research and

enquiry are used to create and

interpret knowledge in the

discipline.

Demonstrate a deep and

systematic understanding of

knowledge, as appropriate to the

area of study, much of which is

at, or informed by, the forefront of

their academic discipline, field of

study or area of professional

practice. Alongside this,

demonstrate a critical awareness

and advanced understanding of

current problems and/or recent

development within the

discipline.

Demonstrate originality in the

application of knowledge,

together with a practical and

reflective understanding of how

established and state-of-the-art

investigative techniques of

research and enquiry are used to

create and interpret knowledge in

the discipline.

Intellectual skills

Be able to analyse, apply and

critically evaluate concepts,

principles and practices at the

forefront of the area of study.

Be able to deeply analyse, apply

and critically evaluate concepts,

principles and practices at the

forefront of the area of study,

demonstrating insight and

innovation, and application of

these skills as appropriate.

Computational

problem-solving

Be able to demonstrate

judgement, critical thinking,

research design, and well-

developed problem-solving skills

with a high degree of autonomy,

and to create effective

computational artefacts given

complex or open constraints.

Be able to demonstrate

innovation and/or originality,

sophisticated judgement, critical

thinking, research design and

well-developed problem-solving

skills with a high degree of

autonomy, and to create

comprehensive and highly

effective computational artefacts

given complex or open

constraints.

Practical

computing skills

Demonstrate the ability to apply

computing techniques, as

appropriate to the area of study,

within complex or unpredictable

scenarios, in a systematic

manner, making appropriate

decisions given incomplete or

missing data.

Demonstrate the ability to apply

state-of-the-art computing

techniques, as appropriate to the

area of study, within highly

complex or unpredictable

scenarios, in a systematic and

creative manner, making

insightful decisions given

incomplete or missing data.

Self-directed

learning and

attainment

Demonstrate elements of self-

direction in tackling and solving

problems, alongside approaching

Demonstrate self-direction in

tackling and solving complex

problems, alongside approaching

Typical

Excellent

and implementing tasks and

activities in a proactive and

effective manner.

and implementing tasks and

activities in a highly proactive

and effective manner.

Professional

practice

Ability to communicate their work

to specialist and a diverse range

of non-specialist audiences.

Identify appropriate practices in

complex and unpredictable

professional environments, and

perform work within a

professional, legal and ethical

framework – including data

management and use, security,

equality, diversity and inclusion

(EDI) and sustainability – in the

work that they undertake.

Ability to communicate their work

to specialist and non-specialist

audiences in an accessible and

impactful way.

Identify and effect best-of-kind

and highly principled solutions in

complex and unpredictable

professional environments, within

a professional, legal and ethical

framework to consistently

address a wide breadth of

relevant considerations –

including data management and

use, security, equality, diversity

and inclusion (EDI) and

sustainability – in the work they

undertake.

Integrated undergraduate master's degrees

4.15 Integrated undergraduate master's degrees (MComp, MEng and MSci) include and

build upon the outcomes of bachelor's degrees with honours to provide a greater range and

depth of outcomes. An integrated course of study typically involves study equivalent

to at least four full-time academic years in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and five

in Scotland (www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/qualifications-frameworks.pdf

paragraph 4.17.4).

4.16 The descriptive characteristics associated with an integrated undergraduate

master's degree as defined within the QAA Characteristics Statement on master's degrees

are considered to apply within this Statement.

4.17 Students graduating with an integrated undergraduate master's degrees in

computing must demonstrate at least a threshold level of attainment across all descriptors in

both FHEQ Levels 6 and 7, or FQHEIS Level 10 and 11 in paragraphs 4.2 and 4.3.

5 List of references and further resources

QAA, 2021, Quality Enhancement Review

www.qaa.ac.uk/reviewing-higher-education/types-of-review/quality-enhancement-review

QAA, Quality Enhancement Framework

www.qaa.ac.uk/scotland/quality-enhancement-framework

Computing Curricular 2020

www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/education/curricula-recommendations/cc2020.pdf

Decolonising the Curriculum

https://edta.info.yorku.ca/decolonizing-the-curriculum

QAA and Advance HE, 2021, Education for Sustainable Development

www.qaa.ac.uk/quality-code/education-for-sustainable-development

QAA, 2018, Enterprise and Entrepreneurship Education: Guidance for UK Higher Education

Providers

www.qaa.ac.uk/quality-code/enterprise-and-entrepreneurship-education

QAA, 2014, The Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Degree-Awarding

Bodies

www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/qualifications-frameworks.pdf

QAA, 2019, Characteristics Statement: Higher Education in Apprenticeships

www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/characteristics-statement-apprenticeships.pdf

OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030 project

www.oecd.org/education/2030-project

QAA, 2020, Contracting to Cheat in Higher Education: How to Address Essay Mills and

Contract Cheating

www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/guidance/contracting-to-cheat-in-higher-education-2nd-edition.pdf

The British Computer Society

www.bcs.org

Annex D: Outcome classification descriptions for FHEQ Level 6 and FQHEIS Level 10

degrees

www.qaa.ac.uk/quality-code/qualifications-frameworks

QAA, 2020, Master's Degree Characteristics Statement

www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/master's-degree-characteristics-statement.pdf

6 Membership of the Advisory Groups for the Subject

Benchmark Statement for Computing

Membership of the Advisory Group for the Subject Benchmark Statement for

Computing and Computing (Master's) (2022)

Dr Alan Hayes (Chair)

University of Bath

Professor Nik Bessis

Edge Hill University

Georgia Clarke

QAA Coordinator

Sarah Clowe

Keele University

Professor Tom Crick MBE

Swansea University

Dr Allison Gardner

Keele University

Professor Paul Hanna

Ulster University

Professor Philip Hanna

Queen's University Belfast

Professor Alastair Irons

British Computer Society

Dr Wendy Ivins

Cardiff University

Kevin Kendall

QAA Officer

Dr Sandi Kirkham

Staffordshire University

Dr Thomas Lancaster

Imperial College of Science, Technology and

Medicine

Dr Mariana Lilley

University of Hertfordshire

Tom Lovell

TechSkills

Professor Minhua Eunice Ma

Falmouth University

Dr Emma Norling

University of Sheffield

Dr Preeti Patel

London Metropolitan University

Professor Shushma Patel

De Montfort University

Professor Karen Petrie

University of Dundee

Professor Mark Perry

Brunel University

Dr Tom Prickett

University of Northumbria at Newcastle

Professor Rupert Ward

University of Huddersfield

Dr Ian Wilson

University of South Wales

QAA would like to thank Professor Elizabeth Cleaver, Professor Michael McLinden and the

Disabled Students' Commission for their valued contributions to the development of the

Statement.

Membership of the Advisory Group for the Subject Benchmark Statement for

Computing and Computing (Master's) (2019)

The fourth edition, published in 2019, was revised by QAA to align the content with the

revised UK Quality Code for Higher Education, published in 2018. Proposed revisions were

checked and verified by one of the Co-Chairs of the Subject Benchmark Statement for

Computing from 2016.

Dr Alan Hayes

University of Bath

Dr Alison Felce

QAA

Membership of the Advisory Group for the Subject Benchmark Statement for

Computing (2015)

Details below appear as published in the third edition of Subject Benchmark Statement for

Computing (2015)

Dr Phil Brooke

Teesside University

Professor Christopher Clare

BCS Academic Accreditation Committee

Dr Tom Crick

BCS Academy

Professor Sally Fincher (Co-Chair)

University of Kent

Alan Hayes (Co-Chair)

University of Bath

Dr Iain Phillips

Loughborough University

Dr Alan Tully

University of Newcastle

Corresponding members

Professor Quintin Cutts

University of Glasgow

Professor Andrew McGettrick

University of Strathclyde

Robert Koger (Employer representative)

Vision Semantics and IET Academic

Accreditation Committee

Emilia Todorova (Student reader)

Glasgow Caledonian University

Janet Bohrer

QAA

Dr Tim Burton

QAA

Membership of the original Advisory Group for the Subject Benchmark Statement for

Computing (Master's) (2011)

Liz Bacon

University of Greenwich

Roger Boyle

University of Leeds

Laurence Brooks

Brunel University

Anne de Roeck

The Open University

Jeff Magee

Imperial College

Gerry McAllister

University of Ulster

Andrew McGettrick (Chair)

University of Strathclyde

Keith Mander

University of Kent

Elizabeth Friend (Coordinator)

BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT

Laura Bellingham (QAA Officer)

QAA

Membership of the Advisory Group for the Subject Benchmark Statement for

Computing (2007)

Details below appear as published in the second edition of Subject Benchmark Statement

for Computing (2007).

Dr Laurence Brooks

Brunel University

Graham Gough

The University of Manchester

Alastair Irons

University of Northumbria

Dr Gerry McAllister

University of Ulster

Professor Andrew McGettrick (Chair)

University of Strathclyde

Professor Keith Mander

University of Kent

Membership of the Advisory Group for the Subject Benchmark Statement for

Computing (2000)

Details below appear as published in the original Subject Benchmark Statement for

Computing (2000).

Professor J Arnott

University of Dundee

Professor D Budgen

Keele University

Dr PC Capon

University of Manchester

Mr G Davies

The Open University

Professor PJ Hodson

University of Glamorgan

Professor E Hull

University of Ulster

Professor G Lovegrove

Staffordshire University

Professor KC Mander

University of Kent at Canterbury

Professor A McGettrick (Chair)

University of Strathclyde

Mr P McGrath

Leeds Metropolitan University

Dr A Norman

University of Cambridge

Mr SJ Oldfield

University of Plymouth

Ms A Rapley

Kingston University

Professor VJ Rayward-Smith

University of East Anglia

Appendix 1 - Mapping and audit templates

1: QAA Computing Benchmark Statements mapping

This provides a mapping of the Subject Benchmark Statement for Computing to the EDI

statements. The intent is not to cover all possible actions and solutions but to provide a

prompt to how the statements can be meaningfully applied.

Subject

Benchmark

Statement

EDI

statement

Explanation

Example

2: EDI audit template

The below EDI audit template allows schools and departments to map their strategies and

course content to the EDI statements. It is advised that the template be adapted for school-

level, programme-level and module-level mapping.

It is assumed that evidence of application of each EDI statement and sub-statements would

occur multiple times throughout.

Strategy and

content

EDI

statement

Explanation

Evidence

Appendix 2 - Examples of ESD approaches

Illustrative examples of approaches to Education for Sustainable Development in current

computing curricula.

Approach

Specialism

Further information

Specific module

Computer science

As an introductory or higher-level module,

Ken Abernethy and Kevin Treu (2014)

Integrating sustainability across the

computer science curriculum, Journal of

Computing Sciences in Colleges, vol 30,

issue 2, pp 220–228

Software

engineering

B. Penzenstadler et al, Everything is

INTERRELATED: Teaching Software

Engineering for Sustainability (2018)

IEEE/ACM 40th International Conference

on Software Engineering: Software

Engineering Education and Training (ICSE-

SEET), pp 153-162

Computer science

Within module entitled 'The Environmental

Impact of Modern Computing' in which

students study the effect that computing

has on the environment via mining and

mineral extraction, manufacturing and

transport, cloud computing and energy

usage.

Key theme

Professional issues

Students consider how technology is part of

the problem and part of the solution as part

of a professional issues module.

Taught material in a module on

Professional Issues on the sustainability

issues involved in the decisions we make

when designing computing systems, and on

how computing can be used to improve

what we do and our understanding of what

is happening.

Gordon N (2015) Sustainable Development

as a Framework for Ethics and Skills in

Higher Education Computing Courses, in:

Leal Filho W, Brandli L, Kuznetsova O,

Paço A (eds) (2015) Integrative

Approaches to Sustainable Development at

University Level, World Sustainability

Series, Springer, Cham, available from:

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10690-

8_24

Software

engineering

Across the software engineering curriculum,

students are required to consider

inclusivity as a key concept in all their

designs. This includes accessible interface

design, and reflection on how all

stakeholders would access the technology.

Cross-curricula

Use of high-

performing computer

Ensuring that ratings of computers look at

FLOPS/watt as well as raw FLOPS, looking

at the power figures in 'Top 500', and also

stressing 'Green 500'.

Infrastructure

Knowledge about environmental impact

related to production of silicon devices and

disposal of obsolete computing equipment.

Machine learning/

big data

Knowledge of the power consumption of

computer hardware, especially big data

processing and blockchain.

Software

engineering

Skills in designing and writing code using

good practice to ensure that it is readable,

updatable and maintainable (and ideally

modular). This reduces total development

costs and extends the lifetime of software,

making the whole process more

sustainable.

Software

engineering

Students are introduced to accessible

design principles in first year, then expected

to apply them in every subsequent design

project (particularly focusing on whether

any design decisions would limit access for

any stakeholder groups).

Indirectly

Introductory

programming

Frame CS1-style/introductory programming

module(s) around sustainability-themed

project.

Jeffrey A Stone and Laura Cruz (2020)

Integrative learning in CS1: programming,

sustainability, and reflective writing, Journal

of Computing Sciences in Colleges, vol 35,

8, pp 44–54.

https://sites.psu.edu/sustainabilitycis/

Projects

Projects that use one or more of the UN's

Sustainable Development Goals as the

focus of the project. Can also involve

external partners and the development of

proof-of-concept prototypes.

Specific module

Business computing

The module explores ICT use and

implementation in areas such as education,

health, e-government and environmental

sustainability within the context of the UNs

Sustainable Development Goals. Students

critically appraise the range of ICT issues

within a developing country, chosen by

themselves from the OECD official

development assistance list. They research

issues that affect successful

implementation of ICTs and give

recommendations on the effective

implementation of ICTs and how certain

Sustainable Development Goals can be

achieved through use of ICTs.

Placements

During their placements, students highlight

the role that a company's conventional

practices (such as agile business

processes) can actually play in enhancing

its sustainability performance, and they also

highlight the commercial benefits of

environmental and social practices (such as

energy and resource efficiency).

Specific module

Computing -

Systems and

systems thinking

Students are required to read up on

Sustainable Development Goals and select

their own case study to base a systems

thinking analysis on. The output requires

presentation of causal maps, a rich picture,

and iceberg model and an impact gaps

canvas (a 'map the system' tool) as the

basis for the systems thinking investigation

of a Sustainable Development Goals