Departmental Learning & Teaching Strategies

1. Departmental Learning & Teaching Strategies John Dickens Director, LTSN Engineering & Associate Dean (Teaching) of Engineering, Loughborough University Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

2. Why have Department Strategies? What should be in them? How should they be created? How should they be monitored? Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

3. National Context Group session Round up session Session Structure Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

4. 1999 TQEF Funding required University L&T strategies 2002 TQEF requires universities to update L&T strategies University L&T Strategies • Who writes them? • What impact do they have on departments? • What impact do they have on student experience? Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

5. Government Policy(HEFCE 24/02) ‘We want to have a clear strategic alliance between our strategies for learning and teaching, widening participation, and disability, within a framework that has the key objective of maintaining and improving quality and standards in learning and teaching.’ Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

6. widening participation (50% by 2010) ensuring fair access to higher education maintaining and improving retention rates enhancing the employability of graduates and diplomates encouraging and disseminating good and innovative practice in support of high quality learning and teaching National Priority Areas Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

7. No increase in numbers of 16 year-olds in education since 1994 No significant increase expected in applicants to HE with A-level or equivalent qualifications Growth must come from under represented groups Supply & Demand(HEFCE 01/62) Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

8. SENDA legislation now in effect Need to have taken all reasonable steps to make learning accessible Learning & Teaching offered to students with special needs should not be ‘ghettoised’ Students with Disabilities Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

9. Need to have defined learning outcomes Need to demonstrate attainment of learning outcomes Need to demonstrate appropriate standards QAA Audit Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

10. Institutional LTS (IS) Guide to good Practice (99/55) HEFCE have commissioned the NCT to write a guide for departmental strategies (DS) examples of DS sought few instances of awareness/alignment with IS evidence of strategic views on L&T some good WP initiatives responsive not pro-active to disabilities issues no integrated strategies HEFCE Publication 02/48 HEFCE Good Practice Guides Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

11. HE’s must align is some way to government policy policy moving from quality assurance to quality enhancement initiatives such as widening participation, access and SENDA will all impact on the mix of students we teach these priority areas can only be delivered in departments Where are we? Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

12. Does your department have an integrated strategy? What is the awareness level of academics of institutional strategy? How should department strategies be developed? What key points would appear in an action plan that could demonstrate the effective implementation of the strategy Discussion Groups Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

13. Loughborough experience • One department in each faculty to produce an integrated strategy • Team to propose the way forward • ADT, Directors of Staff Development, L&T Development and Quality Enhancement units, plus departmental reps. • Departmental reps developed the strategy with all staff at departmental meetings Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

14. Background • Research led, grade 5 wants a 5* and more staff returned, and to increase research income • High quality intake, large numbers of applicants • Retention rates could be better and some over reliance on resits • Staff perceive that their assessment load is excessive Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

15. Actions planned • Retention • mid-sessional tests, tutorial attendance monitoring, interviews with under-performing students • Assessment load • share good practice, use of CAA where appropriate • WP • some use of differential admissions offers Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

16. Positive outcomes • Holistic look at what they are doing which builds on work on programme specifications/ benchmarking in the previous year • Written and owned by the department • Some actions identified to address some issues Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

17. Development ? • Limited engagement with WP issues but this may be appropriate. • Responsive rather than pro-active on disability issues. Need institutional support to move forward • Strategy is a first draft. It should produce some small changes in activity and outcomes but will need regular update and may need to become more ambitious Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002

18. Strategies for Quality Assurance and Enhancement, 6 December 2002