Curriculum representations November 2009

CBM (2009) framework overview 4 views have been identified to represent a course: Pedagogy profile Course map Cost effectiveness Course performance + supporting narrative & good practice principles

4 views have been identified to represent a course:

Pedagogy profile

Course map

Cost effectiveness

Course performance

+ supporting narrative & good practice principles

Selecting exemplars Faculties are identifying courses that are Pedagogically effective Innovative Deliver high levels of student satisfaction and performance Cost effective Aligned with one or more Strategic Objectives Historical and forward looking – an on-going process.

Faculties are identifying courses that are

Pedagogically effective

Innovative

Deliver high levels of student satisfaction and performance

Cost effective

Aligned with one or more Strategic Objectives

Historical and forward looking – an on-going process.

View 1 Pedagogy profile How we want to teach Deconstructing learning activities Analysing student tasks and time Challenging ‘content heavy’ approaches Encouraging variety

How we want to teach

Deconstructing learning activities

Analysing student tasks and time

Challenging ‘content heavy’ approaches

Encouraging variety

Pedagogy profile Maps types of student tasks against course structure Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Total

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Total Block 1 5 3 4 1 0 0 4 Block 2 6 3 3 3 3 2 4 Block 3 6 3 3 3 4 3 4 Total 17 9 10 7 7 5 12

Pedagogy profile widget

View 2 Course map Five components of any structured learning provision Guidance & support Evidence & demonstration Communication & interaction Information & experience Thinking & reflection

Guidance & support Evidence & demonstration Information & experience Communication & interaction Thinking & reflection

Course map/At a glance representation Guidance and support “ Learning pathway” Course structure and timetable Course calendar, study guide, tutorials Information and experience “ Content and activities” Could include course materials, prior experience or student generated content Readings, DVDs, podcasts, lab or field work, placements Communication and interaction “ Dialogue” Social dimensions of the course, interaction with other students and tutors Course forum, email Thinking and reflection “ Meta-cognition” Internalisation and reflection on learning In-text questions, notebook, blog, e-portfolio, Evidence and demonstration “ Assessment” Diagnostic, formative and summative Multiple choice quizzes, TMAs, ECA

Information & experience PDF resources Links to e-journal articles and other websites Evidence & demonstration 6 TMAs – submitted online (505 of overall score) 3hr examination (50% of overall score) Thinking & reflection Activities throughout learning guides (4-7 per guide) 5 website ‘interactives’ Journal space in MyStuff Core questions, thinking points and summaries in course books Communication & interaction Course-wide Café forum Tutor group forums with sub-forums for each block F2F tutorials near beginning, middle and end of course (some regional variation) Guidance & support Study planner 20 Learning guides General assessment guidance TMA questions Course guide Study calendar KE312 Working Together for Children 60pt course over 32 weeks 3 blocks/20 learning guides Whole weeks devoted to TMAs Consolidation week (week 22) Practice related Aligned to latest prof framework for mult-agency working Rich case studies Read – relate to practice – reflect – write 3 co-published course books (21 chapters/ 960pp) DVD – videos of 3 practice settings + interviews (XXmin) Plus own experience and practice Tutor support – 1:20; 21 contact hrs; band 7 Course map example

Practice related

Aligned to latest prof framework for mult-agency working

Rich case studies

Read – relate to practice – reflect – write

View 3 Cost effectiveness Relationships between: Income Student numbers Production activities Presentation activities Central (non IUPC) costs Comparison with other similar courses / models and norms Market driven, external influences CAU, LTS and SS influences Internal, central allocations

Relationships between:

Income

Student numbers

Production activities

Presentation activities

Central (non IUPC) costs

Comparison with other similar courses / models and norms

Current data sources Post launch review process General ledger RPT LTS IUPC analysis SS IUPC analysis PLANET (for student numbers) TRAC (for staff resource) CL

Post launch review process

General ledger

RPT

LTS IUPC analysis

SS IUPC analysis

PLANET (for student numbers)

TRAC (for staff resource)

Example – K208 Effective practice in youth justice CL

Comparison of course costs CL

View 4 Course performance - basic Derived from IET student survey data

Derived from IET student survey data

Course performance – basic plus

‘ View 5’ Supporting narrative and good practice principles Under development. Some examples below: Design decision variable Example Production/pedagogical approach Course guidance: Tutor-directed – student-directed Learning approach: Passive-learning – active-learning Production/content Course team produced: bought in wrap around Reuse: free standing assets – bespoke/contextualised (within faculty & cross-faculty) Production/staff resource Staff resource (academic): 12 months – 18 months Consultancy: 0 -100% Production/timeliness (fit to market) Time scale: 6 months – 2 years Aligns with current subject trends: √ Presentation Tutor/student ratio: N/A , (1-30) – (1-10) Tuition management: centrally managed – hub – regionally managed

Under development. Some examples below:

Course guidance: Tutor-directed – student-directed

Learning approach: Passive-learning – active-learning

Course team produced: bought in wrap around

Reuse: free standing assets – bespoke/contextualised (within faculty & cross-faculty)

Staff resource (academic): 12 months – 18 months

Consultancy: 0 -100%

Time scale: 6 months – 2 years

Aligns with current subject trends: √

Tutor/student ratio: N/A , (1-30) – (1-10)

Tuition management: centrally managed – hub – regionally managed

Relationship with CBM (2008) Course Types Looking to develop exemplars with reference to this classification, recognising in practice we are likely to have hybrids: OU classic Bought-in Wraparound ‘ Empty Box’ Web 2.0 Disaggregated curriculum assets Framework Exemplars Course Types Views

Looking to develop exemplars with reference to this classification, recognising in practice we are likely to have hybrids:

OU classic

Bought-in

Wraparound

‘ Empty Box’

Web 2.0

Disaggregated curriculum assets

Next steps Developing the 5 th view which profiles a course in relation to a set of key variables Continue to refine and consolidate all views Finalise list of exemplar courses and check that all course types represented Produce complete set of views for a selection of exemplars Disseminate discussion document, analysis of exemplar courses and toolkit for faculties to use Arrange further workshops and presentations Integrate this work with Stage Gate Process review, PLANET redevelopment and other initiatives

Developing the 5 th view which profiles a course in relation to a set of key variables

Continue to refine and consolidate all views

Finalise list of exemplar courses and check that all course types represented

Produce complete set of views for a selection of exemplars

Disseminate discussion document, analysis of exemplar courses and toolkit for faculties to use

Arrange further workshops and presentations

Integrate this work with Stage Gate Process review, PLANET redevelopment and other initiatives