Woburn House, Tavistock Square, London Friday 19 th April 2002

1. QAA Subject Benchmarks, National Qualifications Frameworks, Programme Specifications and Progress Files: Where’s the Link? Woburn House, Tavistock Square, London Friday 19th April 2002

2. Introductions • Me • Them • You

3. Programme

4. The context • Increasing public accountability for quality and standards in a mass HE system • Economic prosperity > ‘skills for employability’ • Developing a culture of lifelong learning • Desire to retain diversity and responsiveness • Explicitness and referencing

5. The elements • HEQF (National Qualification Framework) • Credits • Subject Benchmarks • Programme Specifications • PDP (Personal Development Plans) • Progress Files

6. Referencing and explicitness in QAA policy • Move to mass higher education • Neither desirable or possible to achieve uniform standards • Explicitness about what students are to learn and how > learning outcomes • Multiple reference points > internal and external

7. Referencing in QAA policy

8. Promoting an outcomes approach • A statement that predicts what learners will have gained as a result of the learning process • An explicit statement of learning intent • The process to enable the outcomes to be achieved and demonstrated • The criteria for assessing if (and at what level) the outcomes have been achieved INTENT PROCESS ACHIEVEMENT

9. Links in an outcomes approach

10. National Qualifications Framework HEQF • The purpose • To enable the understanding of qualification titles • To maintain international comparability • To help learners to identify progression routes > lifelong learning • To help HEIs, external examiners and reviewers by providing points of reference for setting and assessing standards

11. Qualification Levels • D Doctorates • M Masters, PG Diplomas, PG Certificates • H Honours, Graduate Diploma, Graduate Certificate • I Foundation, Ordinary, DHE • C CHE

12. Qualification Descriptors • Outcomes at each level (not qualification) • Cover the majority of existing qualifications but allow for flexibility and innovation (especially at Level I) • Two parts • Outcomes to be demonstrated for the qualification • Statement of wider abilities

13. Credit Frameworks • HEQF does not provide a credit framework • Clarify the relationship between awards at different levels and pathways to link them • Widen access to lifelong learning • Meet the Bologna Declaration to enable compatibility and comparability between HE in the EU

14. The role of credit • A set of specifications for valuing, measuring, describing and comparing learning achievement in volume and value (level) • Represents learning for the purpose of measuring equivalence • Does not impact on the content on what is learnt

15. Key principles • Award of credit • Notional learning time • 10 hours = 1 credit • Credit levels • Entry, 1-3, 4-6, 7, 8 • Level descriptors • Module (unit of assessment) • Learning outcomes • Assessment criteria – threshold (grading criteria?)

16. Credit values in EWNI

17. Code of practice • Sections of the code: • Postgraduate Research Programmes • Collaborative provision • Students with disabilities • External examining • Academic appeals and student complaints on academic matters • Assessment of students • Programme approval, monitoring and review • Career education, information and guidance • Placement learning • Recruitment and admissions

18. Subject Benchmarks • Subject benchmarks available for all subjects including Business and Management and Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism • Objectives – to facilitate reflection on • The idea of subject benchmarking • The characteristics of benchmark information • The ways subject benchmarks are expected to be used • Subject benchmarks in curriculum design and the assessment of student learning

19. The Background • Emerged from the Dearing report 1997 • And HEQCs Graduate Standards project • QAA • Established 42 subject/disciplinary groups • Convened expert committees • Provided general guidance

20. The aim • To improve the capacity of subject communities to regulate their academic standards by creating subject-based information that can be used by teaching teams to prompt self-critical reflection and development. • By providing a set of reference points, peer reviewers will be able to compare standards more easily

21. Vocabulary • Benchmark • A reference point for similar things • A criterion to be measured against • A mark of distinction • Benchmarking • Referencing and comparing one thing with another

22. Benchmark information • In a subject-based curriculum • The general intellectual outcomes of learning • The learning that is to be promoted • The general criteria to guide judgements on achievement • At honours degree level

23. Benchmark information • Should include • Defining principles or essence of a subject • Nature and extent of a subject – map, boundaries, range of programmes • Attributes that a graduate might be expected to display – knowledge, understanding, skills, methods of learning and assessment • The criteria that would be used to determine whether a graduate satisfied the ‘threshold’ standard for the award

24. Variability of statements(based on initial 22 statements) • Length – 4 to 29 pages • Most written as measurable outcome statements • Knowledge / Themes and Topics / Principles • Mode = 20-30 skill outcomes Range = 7 to 50 • Only half describe teaching, learning and assessment strategies • 60% provide explicit performance criteria • 30% provide three levels of performance (excellent, modal, threshold) 70% just two (modal and threshold)

25. Exploring the standard • Taking either the GB&M or HLS&T benchmark • Is the essence of the subject expressed? • Are the boundaries of the subject clear? • Are knowledge and skill descriptors comprehensive? • Are outcomes explicit and measurable? e.g.? • Are learning processes described clearly? e.g.? • Are performance criteria useful? e.g.?

26. The use of benchmark information • Within institutions • Curriculum design, review, validation • Student assessment • External examiners • Academic review • Programme specifications and self evaluation • Used by peer reviewers • Professional bodies

27. QAA expectations • Not in the benchmark statements • Related to programme specifications • ‘not simply transpose outcomes’ • ‘a stimulus to reflection’ • ‘not all outcomes will be appropriate’ • ‘other reference points will be relevant’

28. QAA expectations • Related to academic review • ‘demonstrate how subject benchmarks have been used to inform decisions about intended outcomes and in calibrating the assessment framework’ • Changes will be reflected through internal cycles of programme review • The curriculum must facilitate the acquisition of knowledge and understanding, cognitive skills, subject specific skills (practical and professional), transferable skills, and the progression to employment or further study • ‘a deliberative process’

29. Curriculum review, design and validation • Create a set of programme learning outcomes • Identify those aligned with benchmark and those that are programme specific • Identify other influential reference points – NICATS, professional bodies • Review and revise existing outcomes as appropriate, justify variances

30. Curriculum review, design and validation • Confirm curriculum provides opportunities for learning outcomes to be developed, practiced and assessed • Curriculum mapping • Student evaluations • Local ownership and distinctiveness • Summarise on programme specification • Institutional approaches to validation

31. Curriculum maps T = taught, P = practiced, A = assessed

32. Assessing student learning and achievement • Statements should give • Assessment methods – but the level of detail varies. General = easy to satisfy • Performance criteria – but also vary in detail, levels, coverage • ‘demonstrate how statements have been used in calibrating the overall demands of the assessment framework’

33. Options Map the performance criteria against the assessment criteria • Map only key / capstone courses offering good range of skills e.g. projects • Map criteria against all core / compulsory modules • Map against all honours level modules • Map against all modules

34. Evaluating the options • Identify the key strengths and weaknesses of the four options identified? • Which option would you choose? • Why? • Will it ‘calibrate the overall demands of the assessment framework’?

35. Assessment issues • Are current assessment models geared to identifying ‘threshold’ standards? Honours classification system v. Learning intentions achieved explicitly • Need for increased range of effective assessment methods • Competency = achieving all outcomes  compensation > acceptable weaknesses? • Areas of performance e.g. law • Consistent interpretation at and above threshold level? Calibration of benchmark criteria against degree classification?

36. Programme Specifications • The purpose is to make the basis for standards explicit by encouraging teaching teams to set out clearly and concisely • The learning outcomes of the programme • The teaching and learning methods that enable learners to achieve these outcomes • The assessment process that demonstrates their achievement • The relationship of the programme to the NQF and other external reference points

37. What is a programme? • A curriculum route that leads to a named award • Single subject route • Major, joint, minor route through subject field • Intergrated multi subject route created by academics • Multidisciplinary route created by student

38. Core information • Awarding institution • Teaching institution • Accreditation authority • Final award • Programme title • UCAS Code • Relevant subject benchmark(s) • Date of production/revision

39. Institutional policies Subject benchmarks PSB requirements Subject benchmarks Qualification descriptors Level descriptors Key skills national standards Occupational standards PSB requirements Institutional policies Subject benchmarks Institutional policies PSB requirements Staff research and professional activities Module specification / indicative content Core information (cont) • Educational aims • Programme outcomes • Knowledge & understanding • Cognitive skills • Subject skills • Transferable skills and other attributes • Teaching and learning strategies • Assessment strategies • Programme structures, contents and requirements

40. Institutional policies Good practice guidelines Institutional policies Other institutions Institutional policies PSB requirements Institution wide rules Other courses Optional Information • Support for learning • Criteria for admission • Evaluation and improvement strategies • Regulations of assessment • Indicators of quality Statistical information on applications, progression/retention, widening participation, results – relative to national norms. Results of external review. PB accreditation. Prizes etc etc

41. Potential uses

42. Exploring programme specifications • How easy is it to find your way around? • Open text or boxed format? • Is the optional information optional? • Is the PS enough on its own? • Is the PS appropriate for all audiences? • Does it do all it sets out to do? • How easy would it be to produce? How long would (should) it take?

43. Putting it all together

44. Summary • Ambitious • Drivers for enhancement by promoting an understanding of learning in different subject contexts • Daunting • Regulatory devices or spur for pedagogic and intellectual debate • Demanding • Sharing the wheels – networks of subject centres and institutional contacts – LTSN role

45. What is Personal Development Planning (PDP)? • PDP is part of the HE Progress File (now being introduced across all levels of HE) • The Progress File will: • Provide each student with a transcript • And a means by which the student can monitor, build and reflect upon their personal development (PDP)

46. PDP is • ‘a structured and supported process undertaken by an individual to reflect upon their own learning, performance and/or achievement and to plan for their personal, educational and career development.’ • (LTSN Generic Centre Guide for Busy Academics)

47. What do we need to do? • At the beginning of the course: • Introduce students to the opportunities for PDP • Throughout each stage of the programme: • Provide opportunities for PDP and explain the possibilities, support and benefits • The nature and scope of provision will be decided within departments / institutions • In order to undertake PDP development a sound understanding of key skills within the curriculum is needed

48. Examples • The Faculty of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Reflective Portfolio • School of Hotel and Restaurant Management, Oxford Brookes University, Progress File

49. Where is the Link? • Aim – To be more explicit about what is learnt and how it is learnt. • Approach is based on learning outcomes. The outcomes approach to learning has 3 parts: • 1. a specification of learning intentions expressed as learning outcomes • 2. the process to enable the outcomes to be achieved and demonstrated • 3. the performance standards or learning outcomes that are actually achieved • (Guidelines for HE Progress Files)

50. Must Look at Resources: • QAA Guidelines / Requirements http://www.qaa.ac.uk/crntwork/progfileHE/contents.htm • Resource Links and Examples http://www.ltsn.ac.uk/genericcentre/projects/pdp/intro.asp • Example Portfolio http://www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/publications/portfolio/ • Key Skills http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/education/cdell/index.htm