predict project plan 25th september 09

8/6/2019 PREDICT Project Plan 25th September 09

1/31

Project Acronym: PREDICTVersion: 4Contact: Pam ParkerDate: 25

thSeptember 2009

Project Document Cover Sheet

Project Information

Project Acronym PREDICTProject Title Promoting Realistic Engaging Discussions In Curriculum Teams

Start Date September 2008 End Date August 2012

Lead Institution City University London

Project Director Dr Susannah Quinsee

Project Manager &contact details

Dr Pam Parker Associate Director Learning Development Centre

020 7040 [email protected]

Partner Institutions N/A

Project Web URL http://www.city.ac.uk/ldc/resources/jisc.html

Programme Name (andnumber)

Institutional Approaches to Curriculum Design

Programme Manager Sarah Knight
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/31


thSeptember 2009

JISC Project Plan

Overview of Project

1. BackgroundWhen the original bid was submitted one objective of the new University strategy was a mandate toreassess all undergraduate programmes in the next two years. The goal of this exercise was toimprove alignment with the University strategy and the revised learning and teaching strategy. Thereassessment of all undergraduate programmes would: a) ensure programmes meet the needs of themarket (both students and employers), b) ensure programmes are fit for purpose, and c) corequalities common to all curricula would be identified. On completion of this task all postgraduateprogrammes will be also be reviewed.

A particular challenge for this exercise is that traditional curriculum design is aligned to disciplinaryboundaries, while we expect to move to a curriculum that has some interdisciplinary aspects. Thisapproach reflects the University strategy and is predicated on the growing consensus thatinterdisciplinary working is necessary to tackle problems that are complex, multidimensional, andopen ended. To address this we must develop a new curriculum design process that is not aligned tosuch boundaries and one where there is a clear educational and operational approach. The designprocess must naturally foster interdisciplinary design and offer agility in ongoing curriculumadjustments to meet changing external and internal influences of our diverse stakeholders whetherlearners, staff or employers.


3/31


thSeptember 2009

We have undertaken a review of all our strategic learning software, including our virtuallearning environment, to ensure that it meets the needs of our staff and students and tomigrate to a flexible learning system that is at the core of our educational offering

2. Aims and ObjectivesAimThe development of a new curriculum design process that is efficient, flexible, focuses on enhancingeducational development and the student experience and, is supported with responsive technology to

accommodate our curriculum models

Objectives

The main objectives of the project are:

By August 2009

To identify our key stakeholders for different stages of the project

To define City University Londons use of the term curriculum design process and what thisincorporates

To analyse the current curriculum design process to identify both factors that enable andinhibit curriculum design including interdisciplinary design

To assess our existing technology support for curriculum design and the factors that wouldenable and support a new process that integrates activities for periodic programme reviewand identify where gaps exist

To acquire any additional technology that is needed to support the curriculum design process

To examine module and programme specifications produced through using PRISM andidentify good practice and areas for development

To examine the revised Periodic Review Process for opportunities for curriculum re-design

T h ll i f ti b t th d d t i i th U i it


4/31


thSeptember 2009

To research other models of curriculum design that are available in the literature and assesstheir potential for usTo develop a new curriculum design process that can be used across the institution withsome adaptation from the stakeholder data collected

To review the approval process and the links with stages of the curriculum design processTo explore the current content and format of the module and programme specifications tomeet future needs of stakeholdersTo link data and actions from the implementation of the undergraduate reviewrecommendations to the curriculum design process

To evaluate the pilots through workshops with all stakeholders and outline positive aspectsand areas that might need reviewing

To examine any feedback from the new periodic review process that might impact on thecurriculum design process and share any data that may be collected related to the actualapproval process with the Academic Development Unit

To disseminate lessons learnt and good practice to our stakeholders, the JISC communityand beyond

By August 2011

To modify the curriculum design process as needed and re-pilot with programmes andSchools who have not yet been involved with the revised curriculum design process

To develop case studies from the stakeholder experiences sharing good practice from thecurriculum design process and review the map of engagement to see if this needs updating

To develop principles and tools such as templates to aid staff involved in curriculum design

To review the evaluation and disseminate data of the curriculum design and change processacross the University

By August 2012

To review the stakeholder map to ensure appropriate engagement has been achieved in all


5/31


thSeptember 2009

3. Evaluation and revision which will consist of using the ongoing evaluating datafrom the curriculum design process and the process of change to refine and furtherdevelop the process. This activity and that of the process of emergent designinteractions by their nature overlap. An essential principle of this process is that ofdeveloping case studies and sharing good practice and lessons learnt not just withinthe institution but with the wider community. It is envisaged that all Schools will haveprogrammes that need some curriculum design activity due to the undergraduatereview recommendations, by the end of August 2011.

4. Monitor and review which will consist of ensuring any remaining changes to thecurriculum design process can be made and the principles and templates that havebeen developed can be reviewed. In addition a full analysis of the project will becompleted.

PREDICT will focus on the undergraduate curriculum and not the postgraduate curriculum howeverlessons learnt and good practice that are transferable to the postgraduate curricula will bedocumented and a plan for any changes will be developed.

Critical success factors for the project include a process for curriculum design that facilitateseducational development, interdisciplinary collaboration, which is supported by technology to enhancethe process from the beginning, that is responsive and agile and, a process that all is owned by thestakeholders.

4. Project OutputsThe project outputs will include:

Six monthly progress reports on the project and the final report

E al ation reports prod ced si monthl


6/31


thSeptember 2009

Through the evaluative approach identified in project plan it is intended that curriculum models thatcan be adapted to a range of professions will be identified and evaluated for their value in theprocess.

The institution has a key objective to reassess all undergraduate programmes and implementrecommendations to enhance these. This project will support this implementation whilst alsodeveloping a curriculum design process that focuses on educational development, enhancing thelearning experience, supporting interdisciplinary programmes and enabling a more responsiveapproach to programme design. The new design process will be incorporated into the usual Universityprocesses once the evaluation data has been collected and analysed.

The project will enable both case studies and guidance materials to be developed which can be usedby others within the JISC community and beyond. Through the dissemination of stages of this projectat conferences and through publications in journals others within the JISC community and beyond willbe able to gain information about lessons learnt and good practice.

6. Stakeholder Analysis

Stakeholder Interest / stake ImportanceStudentscurrent andalumni

Students will be involved in the new design process which will lead toimproved learning opportunities, information about programmes andensure we are better able to prepare students for employment in arange of settings.

Students will be involved in range of ways but these will be discussedwith Schools so that they are appropriate to current studentengagement approaches.

HIGH


7/31


thSeptember 2009

Stakeholder Interest / stake Importance

Seniormanagers

This project relates to some of the strategic imperatives of theUniversity which include facilitating an educational developmentapproach to designing programmes, enhanced opportunity forinterdisciplinary programmes, reviewing the process to be moreresponsive and a clearer focus on the learning experience.

Senior managers will be asked via individual meetings with them whatthey would like the project to deliver in terms of output.

Senior management will be key advocates for the work of the projectas well as ensuring that the project delivers. The project team willreport to internal senior management events to ensure disseminationacross the University and to ensure the project maintains a high profileacross the University.

HIGH

ProjectManagers

There are other reviews being undertaken across the University whichoverlap with some aspects of the project and so in order to ensure thatno repetition occurs and that information is shared other projectmanagers will be provided with regular updates on this project.

In addition members of the PREDICT project team are members of theother projects management meetings.

HIGH

ProjectBoardMembers

The project board members are essential to the progress andevaluation of this project and in raising the profile of the project withinthe Institution and beyond.

All members of the project board will met with individually to discussthe project, their vision of the project and outcomes and their role in

bli th j t t b f l

HIGH


8/31


thSeptember 2009

Stakeholder Interest / stake Importance

HigherEducationalInstitutions

Other institutions will be able to share they experiences of similarinitiatives as well as learning from ours. There will be an opportunity toshare lessons learnt as well as solutions or suggestions for changesand any proposed models that are developed.

This will be achieved through contact with the other design projectsand through dissemination at conferences.

MEDIUM

HEAAcademyandassociatedSubjectCentres

Staff from the Academy and members of subject centres will beinterested in the key findings of the project, any models developed andcase studies focused on specific programmes. This will provideadditional opportunities for dissemination as well as sharing practiceacross the sector.

Links will be made with the University HEA link and through keysubject centre links for the Schools and disciplines at City University.

MEDIUM

JISC ProjectmanagementTeam

JISC as funders of some of the project will want to know that theproject is keeping to its plan and is meeting targets in terms of time andfinance.

The project team will also want to know about the lessons learnt duringthe project both in terms of the actual project and it outcomes but alsoin relation to the project process.

HIGH

JISC Projectcommunity

Other JISC project teams will be kept informed of progress but alsoany information that is relevant to the community as lessons learnt andmodels that may have been developed as well as any innovativeapproaches to involving stakeholders.

MEDIUM


9/31


thSeptember 2009

Risk Probability(1-5)

Severity(1-5)

Score(P x S)

Action to Prevent/Manage Risk

TechnicalCurrent technologies cannotsupport the process

2 3 6 Additional technologies will bepurchased to support the project

There is a change either ina key member of the seniormanagement of theuniversity or in the strategicdirection of the University

1 3 4 At present most of the key seniormanagement staff have beenappointed within the last two yearsand so the University strategy hasbeen revised to look to the next fiveyears and is not due for a majorstrategic review. The Project teamhowever has a key member of thesenior management as itsexecutive and will maintain a clearvision of the University strategy.

However if there are indicationsthat a key senior member of staff isleaving, a change of policy orstrategy is likely to be introducedthe risk to the project would beassessed and consideration givento how the change may lead toamended plans for the project orthe change may in fact enhancethe success and benefit of the

j t


10/31


thSeptember 2009

8. Standards

Name of standard orspecification

Version Notes

BPMN 1.1 Business Process Modeling Notation used to modelbusiness processes. See http://www.bpmn.org/

BPEL 2.0 Business Process Execution Language - used to

make busness processes runnable. Seehttp://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpel

9. Technical DevelopmentCity University has adopted IBMs WebSphere family of products as its strategic solution for SOA.

The core components of this stack includes: -

a) City University Middleware stack which includesa. Modeler Publishing edition which allows a Business Analysts to model processes,

define KPIs, run simulations and collaborate with business users via a web interfaceb. WebSphere Integration Developer which is used to take the output from Modeler and

create a run time version of the process.c. Rational Application Developer which is used to develop core services.d. WebSphere Process Server which is the run-time engine.e. WebSphere Advanced ESB which provides integration capability with our core
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpelhttp://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpelhttp://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpelhttp://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpelhttp://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpelhttp://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpelhttp://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpel


11/31


thSeptember 2009

In addition to this we may consider new Web 2.0 collaborative tools to enhance the user experienceduring the process. These would be delivered via the portal. The products include: -

a) Lotus Connections which provides personal profiles, wikis, blogs, personal document library,activities and supports the concept of social communities.

b) Lotus QuickR which provides a team collaboration capability including Blogs, Wikis,Document Libraries, Activities and Calendaring

c) Lotus Sametime provides presence awareness, instant messaging and web conferencingcapability.

During the course of this project City will be implementing a replacement VLE. Costs and resources toprovide integration with that system will be built in as part of that project.

IBM has a dedicated web site called DeveloperWorks to support developers in best practises for thistechnology. Details on the BPM tools can be found at: -

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/bpm/

10. Intellectual Property RightsAny material developed by the institution during the project will be the Intellectual Property of the CityUniversity London. Where required any third party permission will be sought.

All the project deliverables, reports and other relevant outputs will be published via the project websiteand made freely available to the academic community. Where appropriate, materials will be offeredto relevant repositories (including JORUM and CloudWorks) to support wider dissemination andsustainable access.
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/bpm/http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/bpm/http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/bpm/


12/31


thSeptember 2009

Name Role Allocation ofTime

Contact Details

Helen Emerson,Academic and Professional Processand Support Director,.

Senior Supplier 0.4 FTE [email protected] 7040 8323

This role is waiting for newappointment following a member ofstaff leaving

Project Assurance Two days permonth

[email protected] 7040 4097

John Gallagher,Information Architect

ApplicationArchitect

Two days permonth

[email protected] 069882

Roberta Williams,Associate Dean Learning andTeaching School CommunityAnd Health Sciences (SCHS).

Senior User Two days permonth

[email protected] 7040 8295

Additional School members to bedetermined once pilots identified

Senior User

Sally BradleySenior Lecturer in Curriculum andProfessional Development Learningand Teaching Institute SheffieldHallam University

External Member [email protected]

The project board Terms of Reference are:

The Project Board is responsible for the overall direction and management of the project and hasresponsibility and authority for the project.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


13/31


thSeptember 2009

14. BudgetThis budget reflects the revised one sent to JISC following confirmation of Bid being granted. Seeappendix A. (This is not available in this copy)

Detailed Project Planning

15. Workpackages

See Appendix B


14/31


thSeptember 2009

Page 14 of 31Document title: JISC Project PlanLast updated: April 2007

16. Evaluation Plan

Timing Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be Responsible

This section of the plan relates to the Discovery and planning phase and the learning objectives to be completed for August 2009April2009

The appropriateness ofproject plan

Will the plan enable theapproaches for the projectto achieve the aim?

Review by project boardand programme manager

The plan will encompassall areas required for theproject

Project manager anddirector and the projectmanagement team

April2009

Technological supportavailable for programmedesign at present

What aspects of theprogramme designprocess are currentlysupported by technology?

Analysis of the processand how data is collectedand maintained.Analysis of aspects of theprocess that aresupported by technology

There is an outline of howtechnology currentlysupports the designprocess

Project manager andapplication architect

June2009

The current programmedesign process is outlinedand analysed and anybenefits or issues thatmight impact on aresponsive process or aninterdisciplinaryprogramme are identified

Has the baseline datacaptured the detail of thecurrent programme designprocess as outlined in thepolicy?Are there any benefits orissues with the currentprocess particularly interms of being responsiveand in supportinginterdisciplinaryprogrammes?

Analysis of the processand discussion with staffacross the University

The baseline data hascaptured correctly allaspects of the currentprogramme designprocess from the policyand a list of any benefitsand issues

Staff across the Universityand Project manager

June2009

A comprehensive list ofkey employers andprofessional bodies

involved in programmedesign is complete

Is the list of employersand professional bodiesinvolved in programme

design complete?

Analysis of the list andconsultation with the stafffrom across the University

The list of employers andprofessional bodiesinvolved in the design

process is complete

Staff across the Universityand Project manager


15/31


thSeptember 2009



August2009

All key stakeholders havebeen identified

Have all stakeholdersbeen identified?Are there any groupsmissing?

Documentary analysis ofSchool Curriculum designmeetings, Interviews,Questionnaires

All stakeholders areinvolved and believe theycan contribute to thedesign process

Project Manager, ProjectDirector, Senior UserSchools

August2009

Current module andprogramme specificationsdemonstrate goodpractice in terms of theinformation provided

Do the module andprogramme specificationsprovide clear and accuratedetail about programmes?

Documentary analysis ofmodule and programmespecifications

Module and programmespecifications have beenanalysed and goodpractice and areas toidentify have beenoutlined

Project Manager

August2009

Data collected for theUndergraduate review isshared with the projectmanager for this project

What data has beencollected?What relevant informationhas been gained?

What gaps in the dataexist?

Documentary analysis ofthe data and checking theproject plan for areas notcovered

The data collected can beused for the baselinereport and areas missingcan be identified

Project Manager andSenior Supplier AcademicDevelopment Unit

August2009

All current reviews acrossthe University that havelinks with this project haveshared information

How are all the otherreviews progressing?Has data from the reviewsbeen shared?Are there lessons that canbe shared andsuccesses?Is there any overlap ofeffort?

Discussion with key stafffrom other reviews

There is no overlap ofwork across the reviewsand information is sharedenabling the reviews tocompliment and supporteach other

Lead from other reviewsand Project executive anddirector and Seniorsupplier AcademicDevelopment Unit


16/31


thSeptember 2009



August2009

The short and long termrecommendations for theundergraduate review arepublished

Which are the short termrecommendations forimplementation bySeptember 2010?Which are longer termrecommendations?

Review theUndergraduate reviewreport and list ofrecommendations

The recommendationsneeding action within thenext academic year(September 2010August 2011) can beidentified and those whichwill be implemented afterthis

Project Manager andSenior Supplier AcademicDevelopment Unit

August2009

There is a clear processfor managing a change inthe curriculum designprocess

Is there a process formanaging change acrossthe institution?Are all schools included inthe plans for rolling out thecurriculum designprocess?

Discussion with peers inschools, liaison withsenior management staff,discussion with unionrepresentatives and thedrafting of a plan

The rollout of theCurriculum design acrossthe University is plannedand all are aware of thisand support it

Project executive anddirector

August2009

Additional technologyrequired for the designprocess is acquired

Has the additionaltechnology that wasrequired been acquired?

Review of existingtechnology and a list ofadditional technology thatis required is developed

Additional technology hasbeen acquired

Project manager andapplication architect

August2009

The plan for the project isrevised to take account ofchanges within theinstitution and through thevarious reviews

What issues need to beconsidered when revisingthe plan?What needs to bechanged in the plan toensure this can now betaken forward?

Discussions with ProjectBoard members andpeers within the institutionand those from otherprojects

The revised plan meetsthe needs of the projectand expectations of theboard members

Project board members


17/31


thSeptember 2009


Timing Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be ResponsibleThis section of the plan relates to the Process of Engaging Discussions with Curriculum Teams and the learning objectives to be completed forAugust 2010September2009

Outline the Project Boardmembers expectations ofthe project and theactivities the project is toachieve

What do the Project Boardmembers want the projectto achieve?What specific activities dothe board membersexpect the project toachieve?

Discussion with the boardmembers and examinationof the minutes from themeetings

The project meets theboard membersexpectations and activitiesthat were expected fromthe project have beenundertaken

Project Executive, Directorand Manager

October2009

There areprogrammes/modulesidentified in all schools toundertake the pilots

Which programmes will beused for the pilots?Do the programmes forthe Pilot come fromacross a range ofschools?

Examination of theundergraduate reviewimplementation plan, theMoodle implementationplan, the programmeswithin the Senior User

Schools area and from theaward scheme

There areprogrammes/modulesidentified for the Pilotranging from all Schools

Project Executive andSenior Supplier AcademicDevelopment Unit, ProjectDirector, Senior UserSchools and ProjectManager

October2009

Stakeholder map ofengagement andcommunication

Are all the stakeholdersincluded in the map?What levels ofengagement do thestakeholders have withthe project?What communicationapproaches are needed?

Check the list of identifiedstakeholders, Considertheir role in curriculumdesign and their likelyengagement and howwould be the mostappropriate method tocommunicate. Check thismap with somestakeholders for currentaccuracy

Stakeholders areappropriately engaged inthe project andcommunication with themis effective

Project Manager andDirector and Senior UserSchools


18/31


thSeptember 2009



November 2009

Programme and modulespecifications format andguidance for content areoutlined

What information needs tobe included in thespecification for students,staff andemployers/professionalbodies?How does the informationneed to be provided interms of language?

Discussion with key staffsuch as marketing,student union andworkshops

The programme andmodule specificationsprovide informationstakeholders require in anappropriate language

Senior SuppliersAcademic DevelopmentUnit

Dec2009

Principles and Values forthe curriculum design areoutlined

What are the principlesand values stakeholdershave about curriculumdesign?

Workshops anddiscussions

Principles and Values forthe curriculum design areoutlined

Students, staff across theUniversity, projectexecutive, project director,project manager

Dec2009

Stakeholders views ofcurriculum design as a

process are documented

What are thestakeholders views of

curriculum design?Do the stakeholders makeadaptations to aspects ofthe process and why?What concerns andsuccesses do thestakeholders identifyabout the process?

Questionnaire, Delphistudy, discussions and

focus groups

There is a detailedaccount of the process of

curriculum design from thestakeholders perspectivewhich includes anydeviations they make, anyconcerns they have andany successes theyoutline

Students, Staff,professional bodies and

employers and the Projectmanager

Dec2009

Definitions of key termsare developed

What do stakeholdersmean when they discusscurriculum design,responsive and agile andprinciples and values?

Questionnaire, Delphistudy, focus groups anddocumentary analysis

Definitions are developedfor all key terms

Students, Staff,professional bodies andemployers and the Projectmanager, Senior supplierAcademic Development

Unit


19/31


thSeptember 2009



Dec2009

Other models ofcurriculum developmentare available for theproject team to considerwhen redesigning thecurriculum process

What models ofcurriculum developmentare used across thesector?Do other models andprocesses promoteinterdisciplinaryprogrammes moreeffectively than ours?How long do otherprocesses take?

Examining websites,Discussion with peers,sharing data from acrossthe design projects

Data is available related toother models andprocesses that might meetour needs

Project manager

Jan2010

A range of curriculumdesign processes havebeen used within the pilotsbased upon programmeand School need and theyhave been evaluated

What processes wereused?Did they work?How many programmeswere used in the pilot?

Review whichprogrammes were in thepilot and examine theprocess they used throughdocumentary analysis anddiscussion with thestakeholders

A range of processeswere piloted and aspectsof good practice andareas for development areidentified

Project manager, director,senior user process andsupport and applicationarchitect Senior UserSchools and staff

July2010

The links between thecurriculum design processand the approval processhas been identified

What information from thecurriculum design isneeded for approval?How do these twoactivities compliment eachother?

Sharing data between twoactivities, workshops anddiscussions

There is a clear outline ofwhat information isneeded for bothprocesses and how thesecompliment each other

Project manager andSenior SuppliersAcademic DevelopmentUnit

July2010

Data, plans and activitiesfrom the Undergraduatereview implementationhave been shared with

this project to providefurther evaluation data

What activities from theundergraduate reviewhave related to curriculumdesign?

Has this enabled therecommendations of theundergraduate review tobe implemented?

Sharing data andworkshops

There is a clear linkbetween theimplementation of theundergraduate review

recommendations and thecurriculum design processand project

Project manager, SeniorSuppliers AcademicDevelopment Unit andsenior User Schools


20/31


thSeptember 2009


Timing Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be ResponsibleThis section of the plan relates to the Evaluation and Revision phase and the learning objectives to be completed for August 2011February

2011Data from pilots isdisseminated

Did the process work?What lessons were learnt?

What changes are neededprior to using this withanother group ofprogrammes?

Conference presentations,journal articles, case

studies of the pilots,discussion with peers,project website

The data from the pilots isdisseminated and any

change to the designprocess are made

Staff and students fromSchools who undertook

the pilot and Projectmanager and director andsenior user from theschools and applicationarchitect

August2011

Design process is ready tobe used across otherschools

Have the suggestedchanges been made?Are all Schools now ableto use the process?

Analysis of programmedesign documentation,focus groups andquestionnaire withstakeholders from acrossschools

The design process hasbeen used all schools

Project executive, directorand manager and SeniorUser from the Schools

August

2011

Review the revised

periodic programmereview to explore if thereare issues related tocurriculum design as partof the process

Have the periodic reviews

undertaken to datepromoted curriculumdesign as part of thisprocess?

Analysis of periodic

programme review reportsand documentation, anddiscussions with staffinvolved in theseprocesses

The curriculum design is

supported by the revisedperiodic programmereview process

Students, staff from

schools, senior userschools, project managerand senior supplieracademic developmentunit

August2011

Principles and valuesunderpinning thecurriculum design processrepresent stakeholderviews

Do all stakeholdersidentify with the principlesand values?Do all stakeholders knowabout the principles andvalues?

Focus group discussionswith Stakeholders andanalysis of documentationused throughout thecurriculum design process

All stakeholders canoutline the principles andvalues underpinningcurriculum design anddisplay ownership of these

Project Manager, SeniorUser Schools

August2011

Dissemination andintegration of any data

from the use of theprocess across all schools

Have findings been takeninto account with each use

of the process?Have lessons been learntbeen shared internally andacross the wider sector?

Data analysis, focusgroups, questionnaire,

discussion with peers,conference presentations,journal articles, projectwebsite

The process isdisseminated

Staff and students fromSchools, employers and

professional bodies,Senior ManagementProject manager anddirector and Senior UserSchools


21/31


thSeptember 2009


Timing Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be ResponsibleThis section of the plan relates to the Monitor and Review phase and the learning objectives to be completed for August 2012

August2012

The new process issuccessful

Did all stakeholders feelthe process met their

needs?Was the changesuccessfully introducedacross all schools?

Questionnaire, focusgroups, documentary

analysis, discussion withpeers

All stakeholders think thenew process is successful

Staff and students fromSchools, employers and

professional bodies,Senior ManagementProject manager anddirector and Senior UserSchools

August2012

There is dissemination ofthe project outcomes

Have the outcomes fromthe project been sharedacross the sector?

Case studies, guidancematerials, conferencepresentations, articles

Project outcomes havebeen disseminated

Staff, Senior Managers,Senior User SchoolsProject manager/Director


22/31


thSeptember 2009

17. Quality Plan

OutputTiming Quality

criteriaQA method(s) Evidence of

complianceQuality

responsibilitiesQuality tools

(ifapplicable)

Ongoing Extent of

stakeholderengagementand input

Review of

activities anddocumentation

All stakeholders

are included inactivities andprovideinformation

Project Board N/A

Ongoing Goodpractice andlessonslearnt areshared

Internalnewsletters andseminars,external use ofcase studies,

conferencepresentationsand articles

Good practiceand lessonslearnt fromPREDICT areshared within the

institution andthe widercommunity

Project Board N/A

June2009

There is anoutline of thefuture needsforcurriculumdesign

Review theinformationcollected andensure all needsare met

The outline forthe future isclearly articulatedand all agree it isfit for purpose

Project Board N/A


23/31


thSeptember 2009

OutputTiming Quality

criteriaQA method(s) Evidence of

complianceQuality

responsibilitiesQuality tools

(ifapplicable)

August2011

There is aplan for thisto becomeeverydaybusiness

Developprocedures

The newprocedure isknown to all andis part of thenormal business

Project Board N/A

June2012

The projectwas effectivein achievingthe aim

Review allinterim reportsand the finaldraft report

The interimreports and finaldraft reportidentifies theoverall aim hasbeen achieved

Project Board N/A

18. Dissemination Plan

Timing DisseminationActivity

Audience Purpose Key Message

Ongoing Institution websiteand tools forcommunication

All stakeholders To provideupdates on theproject andenablestakeholders to

Ensuringstakeholderengagement


24/31


thSeptember 2009

Timing DisseminationActivity

Audience Purpose Key Message

Annually Workshops All stakeholdersand wider HEIstaff andstakeholders

To ensureengagement bystakeholders andto share goodpractice but alsofor stakeholdersto develop some

ownershipthrough regularcontact and input

Ensuringstakeholderengagement andownership andmaximisedissemination

Annually Developing CaseStudies

Wider HEI staffand stakeholders

To share goodpractice andlessons learntfrom thestakeholdersperspective as

well as the projectteam

Promotingstakeholderengagement andownership andSharing goodpractice

Annually Conference papersand posters forHEA, Technologyorganisations andLearning andTeaching groups

Wider HEI staffand stakeholders

To share goodpractice andlessons learntfrom thestakeholdersperspective aswell as the project

Promotingstakeholderengagement andownership andSharing goodpractice


25/31


thSeptember 2009

19. Exit and Sustainability Plans

Project Outputs Action for Take-up & Embedding Action for ExitReports To be published on Institution

website and JISCTo evaluate the project andprocess and inform future suchprojects

Case Studies To share lessons on the project and

how the process was used bothinternally and within the widercommunity

To share the outcomes of the

project so others might explorehow these may be applied intheir area

Curriculum developmentand approval process

To become part of the Universityprocedures by pilot studies,evaluation, integration of evaluationoutcomes and redesign

To embed the project outcomesand the new approval process

Research and Scholarlyoutputs

To disseminate the project activitiesand methods

To inform future projects of thisnature both internal and

external and disseminate theproject outcomes

Project Outputs Why Sustainable Scenarios for TakingForward

Issues to Address

Final Evaluationfollowing first cohort

Vital evaluation dataof effectiveness of

Review evaluation data forany further changes that

Feedback to allstakeholders


26/31


thSeptember 2009


Appendix B

JISC WORK PACKAGE

WORKPACKAGES

Month 1S08

2O08

3N08

4D08

5Ja09

6F09

7M09

8Ap09

9My09

10Ju09

11Jy09

12Au09

13S09

14O09

15N09

16D09

17Ja10

18F10

19M10

20Ap10

21My10

22Ju10

23Jy10

24Au10

1: 1&11

2&3

12 4,6,7&8

9 5&10

2: 13141516

24

18 17 24 19202122

23

WORKPACKAGES

Month 25S10

26O10

27N10

28D10

29Ja11

30F11

31M11

32Ap11

33My11

34Ju11

35Jy11

36Au11

37S11

38O11

39N11

40D11

41Ja12

42F12

43M12

44Ap12

45My12

46Ju12

47Jy12

48Au12

3: 27 29 28 25 29 26

4: 32 3132

30 32

Project start date: 01/09/08

Project completion date: 31/07/12

Duration: 48 months

C


27/31


thSeptember 2009


Work Package and Activities Earlieststart date

Latestcompletiondate

Output (deliverables and reports in bold)Milestone Responsibility

YEAR 1

WORKPACKAGE 1:Objective:The objective for work package 1 is to undertake areview of and, discover and plan for curriculumdesign and identify aspects of good practice

01/09/08 31/08/09

1. Review original project plan and revise andexpand for a draft project plan

15/10/08 05/12/08 Draft project plan, work plan andbudget Completed

Ongoing Pam Parker

2. Collect data on all stakeholders involved in

curriculum development and approval across theinstitution and create a list

01/12/08 31/01/09 A List of all stakeholders involved in

curriculum development and approvalCompleted

Pam Parker

3. Outline current processes of curriculumdevelopment and approval

01/12/08 31/01/09 Outline of curriculum development andapproval process Completed

SusannahMarsden

4. Outline different modes for involvingstakeholders in the project

01/02/09 30/06/09 Different modes of involving stakeholdersidentified Completed

Pam Parker

5. Link with key staff in other reviews that impactor overlap with this project

01/01/09 Links are established with key staff inother reviews to ensure findings andactivities are shared and complimenteach other

Ongoing David Bolton &SusannahQuinsee

6. Develop baseline data report on a range of areas 01/04/09 31/07/09 Baseline data report is produced and isan ongoing record of activity Completed

Pam Parker

7.

Outline current technology support forcurriculum development and identify any gaps

01/12/08 30/04/09 Outline of current technology supportability and any gaps Completed

John Gallagher

P j t A PREDICT


28/31


thSeptember 2009





8. Analyse the current programme and modulespecifications to identify the information theyprovide and good practice

01/01/09 30/04/09 Programme and module specificationsare analysed for details of theinformation they contain and areas ofgood practice Completed

Pam Parker

9. Examine the data collected from theundergraduate review for the baseline datareport and to avoid duplication of data collectionduring the project

01/05/09 31/07/09 The data collected has been analysedand added to the baseline data reportwhere appropriate and a note of gaps inthe data has been made for further datacollection Completed

Pam Parker/SusannahMarsden

10.Review the undergraduate reviewsrecommendations for short and long term actionsand those that will that can be focused upon for

the curriculum design pilots

31/07/09 31/08/09 A summary of all recommendations hasbeen examined and those that can befocused upon for the pilots have been

identified Completed

Pam Parker

11.Set up Project website at Institution 01/12/08 31/12/08 Website developed at institutionCompleted

Pam Parker

12.Submit final project plan 01/02/09 30/04/09 Final project plan Completed Pam Parker

YEAR 1/2

WORKPACKAGE 2:

Objective:The objective for work package 2 is to develop anew process for curriculum design and pilot this

01/09/08 31/08/10

13.To identify Project members expectations of the

project and activities

01/09/09 30/10/09 Expectations of the Project Board

members in terms of the project andactivities are outlined

Pam Parker

14.Develop a stakeholder map outlining the range,their level of engagement and appropriate modesof communications about the project

01/09/09 30/10/09 A comprehensive Stakeholder map isdeveloped which can used for evaluationof their engagement

Pam Parker

Project Acronym: PREDICT


29/31


thSeptember 2009





15.Develop a plan for the change managementprocess and ongoing evaluation of the project

30/09/09 30/10/09 There is a plan for managing change andthe ongoing evaluation of the project

Pam Parker/SusannahQuinsee

16. Identify programmes and Schools to involve inthe pilot of the curriculum design process

30/09/09 30/10/09 A list of Programmes and Schools whowill be involved in the pilot is developed

David Bolton,SusannahMarsden,SusannahQuinsee, PamParker andRobertaWilliams

17.Through discussion with the stakeholders

involved in the curriculum design pilots identifytheir vision of the curriculum design process,their principles and values

01/11/09 31/01/10 A document detailing visions for the

curriculum design process with principlesand values developed form thestakeholders is developed

Pam Parker

18.Undertake research into approaches tocurriculum design including for interdisciplinaryprogrammes with other institutions and throughthe literature

01/09/09 31/12/09 Document outlining approaches toCurriculum design and anarticle/conference presentation withcase studies

Pam Parker

19.Review the current approval process for links tothe curriculum design process and informationrequired by both to articulate this clearly andidentify changes to the approval process

1/11/09 31/08/10 There is a clear statement about theinformation needed for both activitiesand following the review of the approvalprocess there will be a new processoutlined

SusannahMarsden

20.Programme and module specification format will

be reviewed to meet stakeholder needs andthrough consultation with them the contentprovided will be in a more appropriate language

1/11/09 31/08/10 Programme and module specifications

will be produced as report that meet theneeds of stakeholders and in anappropriate language

Susannah

Marsden



30/31


thSeptember 2009





21.The management and implementation of theundergraduate review recommendations enablesdata to be shared with this project andprogramme teams take part in this curriculumdesign project as they action the plans

1/11/09 31/08/10 Programmes implementing theundergraduate review recommendationscontribute to the curriculum designproject as additional pilot studies

SusannahMarsden

22.Evaluation of pilots is undertaken to identifygood practice and changes that are needed

01/05/10 31/08/10 Evaluation report of the pilot studies andarticle, conference presentation, casestudies

Pam Parker andRobertaWilliams

23.Review the evaluation of the periodic reviewprocess to identify if there are any implicationsfor the curriculum design process

01/07/10 31/08/10 An evaluation report of any implicationsfor the curriculum design process isdeveloped

Megan Palmerand Pam Parker

24.Provide interim reports on the project with any

relate evaluation data included

31/10/09 30/04/10 Two Interim reports Pam Parker

YEAR 3

WORKPACKAGE 3:

Objective:The objective of work package 3 is to evaluate andbuild on the curriculum design process using theevaluation data

01/09/10 31/08/11

25 Develop lessons learnt and successes of the pilotdesign process with stakeholder feedback on theirexperiences and develop some case studies

01/11/10 28/02/11 Lessons learnt guide, Good PracticeGuide and Case Studies developed withstakeholders

Pam Parker andRobertaWilliamsr

26 Modify the curriculum design process drawingupon the experiences of the stakeholders and thefindings from activity 23

01/11/10 30/06/11 Revised curriculum design process isdeveloped drawing upon the stakeholderexperiences

Pam Parker,John Gallagher& HelenEmerson



31/31


thSeptember 2009





27 Roll out the curriculum design process across allschools

01/09/10 Remaining Schools use curriculum designprocess

Ongoing Pam Parker

28 Review the stakeholder map, principles andvalues for curriculum design to ensure theinformation is up to date and is inclusive

01/10/10 31/12/10 An evaluation of the stakeholder mapand principles and values used forcurriculum design to ensure these arestill appropriate

Pam Parker &SusannahQuinsee &RobertaWilliams

29 Provide interim reports on the project 31/10/10 30/04/11 Two Interim reports Pam Parker

YEAR 4

WORKPACKAGE 4:Objective:The objective of work package 4 is to monitor,review and extend the curriculum developmentand approval process

01/09/11 31/08/12

30 Undertake a full analysis of the project takingaccount of areas that may need to be completedafter the project life ie stakeholders employinggraduates and graduates

01/12/11 30/06/12 Articles, conference papers, casestudies and guidance

Pam Parker &SusannahQuinsee

31 Undertake an evaluation of the change processused across the institution and lessons learnt as wellas good practice

01/12/11 30/04/12 Articles, conference papers, casestudies and guidance

Pam Parker &SusannahQuinsee

32 Provide a final interim report, draft final reportand the final report on the project

31/10/11 &30/04/12

31/07/12 Final Interim Report, Draft Final reportand Final Report

Pam Parker

predict project plan 25th september 09

Documents