Embedding graduate attributes within the curriculum Rhona Sharpe, OCSLD Liz Turner, APQO

1. Directorate of Human Resources Embedding graduate attributes within the curriculumRhona Sharpe, OCSLDLiz Turner, APQO

2. “Every undergraduate programme will include the development of the five core graduate attributes”

3. Supporting curriculum design • Evidence-informed conceptual frameworks, and opportunities for staff to discuss them • Tools for mapping and design, working in extended programme teams • Examples and case studies, showing disciplinary differences • Flexible, customisable resources. • Engagement with students

4. Supporting curriculum design at Brookes

5. Challenges • Many change agents in new roles, with new teams • How can we engage students? • What incentives and/or requirements are needed for programme teams to engage? • …

6. What might help? • Revised documentation • Programme mapping and design tools • Ideas for engaging students • Action plans

7. Context for changes to documentation QAA institutional audit 2010- identified weaknesses across the range of QA processes and in the quality of programme information provided on the APQO website Information – strong current theme in HE… • KIS programme information- proportion of time spent on different learning and teaching activities- different assessment methods used- professional body recognition • White Paper 2011- chapter on ‘well-informed students driving teaching excellence’ • QAA institutional review method from 2011/12 - new judgement on quality of published information

8. ‘New’ programme documentation Programme handbook • ‘contract’ between students and department: builds on the PS • should be informative and unbiased: give accurate picture of demands of programme and entitlements to learning resources and support • links to other relevant University frameworks: regulations and policies, central support services • information to be updated centrally • no need for full module descriptors if module handbooks are provided.

9. Submission document • for approval panel only: not for publication after panel event • addresses confusion in current guidance between what is required in handbook for students and what is required for validation purposes • concise, evaluative account to help panel understand how and why a programme has been designed in the way it has been presented, and promote discussion at the event • show how: academic standards defined, PSRB requirements addressed, and quality of student learning experience placed at centre of programme design.

10. Programme Specification • essentially, a ‘contract’ between University (awarding body) and Department delivering provision • should be addressed to students (and accessible to other interested parties, e.g. PSRBs, vehicle for KIS) • learning outcomes and TLA strategies linked to P/GAs • links to other University student experience initiatives: Assessment Compact, employer engagement, graduate employability • more explicit link to PSRB requirements for accreditation

11. Module descriptors • learning outcomes linked to P/GAs (but only the ones addressed by the module) • encouraging alignment between learning outcomes, teaching and learning activities, and assessment tasks • clarity about how module contributes to programme LOs • how learning hours divided between different learning activities • information about formative and summative assessment

12. Tools for programmes 1: examples of activities

13. Task 1 Each group look at one of the five graduate attributes + a PG group Appoint a chairperson and one or two recorders to complete the grids (neatly please). Where do you do this already? Go round the group generating examples of activities for the GA (let everyone have a turn). How is this GA taught, practised and assessed?

14. Tools for programmes 2: programme mapping Not ‘one hit’ – it works step by step Progression – over time at Brookes Address all five –GAs are not discrete; can ‘double count’. Range of experiences all shaped by the disciplinary context

15. Task 2 How can you show how this GA is developed, progressively over time? Do you need different representations of the course for programme teams, quality assurance and students? Amend the suggested mapping grid (or feel free to design a new one).

16. Key messages from groups • Good opportunity to share practice. There is lots going on, easy to identify learning activities. • Activities need to start from where students are at when they arrive • There are lots of opportunities – students don’t always take them. • Some of what is going on is not assessed. • More difficult to assess process than outcome of learning

17. About the mapping • Should we do the mapping? Who is it for? • Grid going to get complicated when put all the GAs through it. • Mapping needs to recognise the multiple attributes developed in many modules • Student facing documentation could focus on employability (not QA), that’s what students are interested in. • Could map on the student not the programme

18. OCSLD Support for SESE • Awareness raising roadshows around the graduate attributes • Open, searchable collection in RADAR • Course design intensives for programme teams • Case studies of graduate attributes in action from around Brookes