UNIVERSITY VOCATIONAL AWARDS COUNCIL

Employer and IndividualDemand for Higher Level Skills –The Role of Higher EducationThe abridged proceedings of the University Vocational Awards Council Annual Conference

York, November 2009

Employer and Individual Demand for Higher Level Skills The Role of Higher Education

The abridged proceedings of the University Vocational Awards Council Annual Conference York, November 2009

CONTENTS

1 FOREWORD Adrian Anderson, Chief Executive, UVAC

3 MARKETING TO BRIDGE THE GAP - Helen Pennack, Head of Marketing Communications, University of Leicester and Linda Mee, Business Development Manager, The Leading Edge, University of Leicester.

10 I-CD UNITS – UNCHAINING HIGHER EDUCATION Kim White, Chief Executive, Intelligent Career Development Limited

16 MIND THE GAP! A LEARNING JOURNEY IN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Helen Corkill and Steve Kendall, University of Bedfordshire and Concepta Palk, CPC Ltd

21 BRIDGING THE GAP: MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY BUSINESS SCHOOL AND THE RECRUITMENT & EMPLOYMENT CONFEDERATION (REC) Dr Philip Frame, Director of Work Based Learning Programmes, Middlesex University Business School and John Cunningham, Head of Qualifications, Recruitment & Employment Confederation (REC)

26 THE RURAL EMPLOYER ENGAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT NETWORK: LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE FIRST YEAR OF THE PROJECT Lydia Arnold and Liz Warr, Harper Adams University College and Jenny Newlyn, Royal Agricultural College

35 EMPLOYER LED DEVELOPMENT OF A HIGHER APPRENTICESHIP IN ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY – A CASE STUDY IN EFFECTIVE EMPLOYER ENGAGEMENT OPENING UP PROGRESSION FOR WORK-BASED LEARNERS Geoff Anderson, Head of Centre for Work-based Learning, University of Greenwich and Hugh Joslin, Director of the Kent and Medway Lifelong Learning Network

41 DISAGGREGATING THE CURRICULUM – FROM FULL MEAL TO BITE SIZED PROVISION Jeff Braham and Ann Minton, University of Derby

52 PARTNERSHIPS NOT PRODUCTS: A CLIENT FOCUSED APPROACH TO CO-FUNDING Jane Timlin, Business Development Manager, The University of Salford and Contributing Case Study Partner, Ann Graves, Organisational Development Manager, Capita Symonds Regions

© University Vocational Awards Council 2010

ISBN: 978-0-907311-34-8

University of Bolton

FOREWORD Adrian Anderson, Chief Executive, UVAC Formed in 1999, UVAC has been at the forefront of championing higher level work-based learning, the higher level skills agenda, and work based progression from Apprenticeship to and through higher education. During this period UVAC’s Annual Conference has charted the development of policy and practice related to higher vocational learning, work-based learning and higher level skills. Additionally the Annual Conference has enabled HEIs, FECs and partner organisations to showcase innovation and good practice, network and also to contribute to and influence the debate - a debate that has grown substantially in importance and stature, in part because of the activities of UVAC and our membership. In addition to the standing of our research reports and good practice guides, we are delighted that UVAC is increasingly seen, though our advocacy activities, as the leading membership organisation championing and mainstreaming innovation in vocational and work-based learning at all higher education levels. Our November 2010 Annual Conference, marks a watershed for UVAC and will see the launch of UVAC’s new academic journal Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning (HESWBL). The journal is targeted at academics researching in the area of higher level skills, practitioners who deliver higher level skills provision and those who direct policy at institutional and national levels. The editorial policy of the journal is to facilitate relevant and rigorous national and international research and practice that is impactful. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning will build on UVAC’s established research base which includes over 20 research reports and guides focused on higher level skills, work-based learning and work-based progression. All of these reports are available on the UVAC website; the list below highlights some of the most recent reports: • Progression from Vocational and Applied Learning to Higher Education across the UK A comparative study by the University Vocational Awards Council for the UK Commission for

Employment and Skills

• Progression from vocational and applied learning to higher education in England. A report produced by Professor Joy Carter, Chair of UVAC for Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Minister of State for Higher Education on progression from vocational and applied learning to higher education in England.

• UVAC Annual Conference Proceedings 2008. The abridged proceedings from the 2008 conference.

• UVAC Annual Conference Proceedings 2007. The abridged proceedings from the 2007 conference.

• UVAC Annual Conference Proceedings 2006. The presentations, speeches and papers from the 2006 conference.

• Work-based Learning Futures III. The proceedings from the Work-based Learning Futures III Conference, Derby, April 2009, organised by the University of Derby and Middlesex University.

• Work-based Learning Futures II. The proceedings from the Work-based Learning Futures II Conference, Middlesex, May 2008, organised by the University of Derby and Middlesex University

• Work Based Learning Futures. The proceedings from the Work based Learning Futures Conference, Buxton, April 2007, organised by the University of Derby and Middlesex University

• Incorporating into HE Programmes the learning people do for, in and through work. A guide for HE managers and practitioners.

1

• Integrating Work Based Learning into Higher Education: A Guide to Good Practice. A report sponsored by the LCCI Commercial Education Trust.

Core, of course, to UVAC’s activities has been promoting the innovation and good practice developed by the HE and FE sectors. From past experience, we believe that conference delegates and UVAC members will find the publication of the papers in this report, which outline institutional approaches to the higher level skills agenda and work-based learning presented at our 2009 Annual Conference, of considerable value.

Adrian Anderson Chief Executive www.uvac.ac.uk

2

MARKETING TO BRIDGE THE GAP Helen Pennack, Head of Marketing Communications, University of Leicester and Linda Mee, Business Development Manager, The Leading Edge, University of Leicester

Introduction

This paper will consider how marketing communications can be used to market higher education to employers. It will focus on the challenges pertinent to the University of Leicester; marketing communications theory and how theory is practised when recruiting students followed by a close examination of how this has been translated to marketing to business.

Leicester’s challenge

The employer engagement offering at the University of Leicester is of ‘bespoke courses built from scratch’ and customisation of existing courses for employee training. An analysis of this approach using Ansoff’s product-market growth matrix1 shows that this is called diversification (new products into new markets) and market growth (existing products into new markets) respectively. Diversification is the hardest form of growth to achieve.

To enable business objectives to be successfully met when faced with this kind of a challenge, it is important that the seven Ps of the marketing mix are clearly defined and in place before going to market.

1 Ansoff, H.I. (1968) Corporate Strategy London: Penguin Books

3

The extended marketing mix* (for services) is2:

1. Product 2. Price 3. Place 4. Physical evidence 5. Process 6. People 7. Promotion

Defining the 7 Ps for Leicester’s employer engagement activity

Product This is hard to define when the offering is ‘tailor-made courses’ – can the market realistically define precisely what it wants? The simpler approach is to offer customisation of an existing programme having identified broad areas where skills development is required.

Price Because it is difficult to define the product, pricing strategies are hard to undertake. However this is easier if customisation of existing courses is the core product being offered.

Place Where delivery takes place. This could be defined as part of the product itself – for example on site delivery of seminars, delivery by distance learning.

Physical evidence Marketing collateral and taster courses provide physical evidence for a service which is otherwise quite intangible.

Process This is customer service more generally and the process for admitting students, as well as delivering the course.

People People are the product in services and are essential to the process – people cannot be separated from either.

Promotion Marketing communications - this will form the focus of the rest of this paper.

How can marketing communications bridge the gap with employers?

Marketing communications strategy – the theory

AIDA is widely accepted as the underpinning strategy for the formulation of marketing communications. This acronym stands for the following:

2 Dibb, Simkin, Pride & Ferrell (1991) Marketing (European Edition) London: Houghton Mifflin Company

4

Awareness

Cognitive

Interest

Affective

Desire

Behaviour

Action

This represents the psychological process that underpins the buyer decision-making journey3.

How does it work in reality?

Marketing communications is used most extensively at the University of Leicester in recruiting students – undergraduates, postgraduates and distance learning students. Can anything be learned from this activity to inform marketing to employers?

Awareness can be summarised as University reputation, which is generated through a variety of means including league table rankings, word of mouth and media coverage. Awareness is proactively generated through schools liaison activity, events and advertising.

Interest is captured through a variety of mechanisms – for example a request for a prospectus or course brochure, booking for an open day, or completion of a ‘tell me more’ card filled out at an event such as a HE fair or overseas visit. The key is to systematically capture enquirers’ details. This enables contact details to be stored in the customer relationship management database and for relationship marketing to be undertaken.

Desire is created in the prospective student through relationship marketing activity. If desire can be created then psychologically the next step – action – can be taken. So how is this done? The objective of relationship marketing is to instil trust in the brand and product or service, instil confidence in the ability of the service provider to deliver a clear benefit and should address any concerns that a prospective student may have. This is also achieved through ‘physical evidence’ for example a prospectus, a video on the website, sample learning materials, as well as advice, news stories and profiles of current students.

The key principles of customer relationship management are that communications are personalised, timely and customised; that means relevant to the prospective student. Customisation and relevancy can only be achieved by having a thorough understanding of the customer. What are their information needs, their fears, who might be influencing their decision and therefore also needs to be

3 Brassington, F. & Pettitt, S. (2003) Principles of Marketing Essex: Pearson Education Ltd.

5

communicated with, what are their concerns and interests? How can we demonstrate an understanding of and an affinity with the prospective student? Critically relationship marketing communications must make it clear what the action or the next step is.

Doing this well will help ‘move’ the prospect through to the next stage in the buyer decision-making process – to action. In student recruitment ‘action’ may be a series of activities such as booking an open day, making an application, accepting an offer or making payment. The AIDA process can be repeated many times during the decision-making journey to bring a prospective student through the broader recruitment process.

How marketing communications are used to promote training opportunities to employers

The Leading Edge

“In an economic downturn there is always the temptation for businesses – large and small – to cut spending on staff training. When times are tough, it looks a simple way to cut costs.

But it’s a false economy. Research in 2007 confirms that firms that don’t train are 2.5 times more likely to fail than those who do! Now is precisely the time to keep investing in the skills and talents of our people.”4

The University of Leicester was awarded funding under HEFCE’s Employer Engagement Programme in June 2008 for a period of 3 years and The Leading Edge was set up within the Institute of Lifelong Learning as a dedicated unit to work with organisations locally and nationally to provide cost effective solutions for their higher education skills needs. Tasked with building capacity around workforce development and providing an opportunity for growth in co-funded numbers it is the intention to move towards a sustainable model that is embedded into the University of Leicester’s employer engagement strategy by the end of the funding period.

An effective marketing strategy is one of the most essential components of Leicester’s employer engagement activity in this area. The message and the way in which it is articulated to employers has to sit alongside the University’s wider marketing activity as well as resonate with businesses in a way that is meaningful to them. It must articulate a complex offer but do so in simple ‘non-academic speak’.

Despite the University’s undeniable success in recruiting individual students both at undergraduate and postgraduate levels, The Leading Edge faced a challenge when it appeared that many companies were seemingly unaware that they could engage with the University for their staff development and training programmes, preferring instead to go to, for example, private training providers and FE Colleges for programmes that are considered more ‘vocational’ or ‘work-based’.

The following two case studies will illustrate how The Leading Edge has attempted to apply the AIDA strategy in its marketing communications to the business community.

Case Study 1 – Business Breakfast Seminars

A series of free events, aimed at the local business population, were organised from January to June 2009. The series consisted of six short, sharp monthly sessions taking place at a suitably convenient time and venue: early morning so as not to impact on the working day of delegates; at a well-known, easily accessible venue – the Walkers Stadium; on the last Wednesday of the month so as to become a regular date in peoples’ diaries.

4UKCES UK Commission for Employment and Skills open letter to UK Employers (23 October 2008)

6

The sessions covered topics believed to be of current and relevant interest to local businesses and which were aligned to Leicester’s capabilities. They included subjects such as Strategy, Leadership, Marketing and High Performing Teams. It was paramount to showcase the University’s expertise i.e. knowledge and research and to demonstrate how this can be applied in ‘real’ business situations. This was achieved by having a highly respected academic presenting on his specialism and combining this with a ‘warts and all’ case study from a representative from a local company. These included an award winning company in the Leicestershire Business awards, an ex Chief Superintendent from a Midlands Police Force and an SME (Small and Medium Sized Enterprise) that had been rated that year in the top five of the Sunday Times Top 25 SME best small companies to work for.

The programme of Business Breakfast seminars were organised and delivered in partnership with Business Link. Consultations between The Leading Edge and Business Link took place so as to agree the design and format of the events and the choice of topics. All promotional material was co-badged and details of the events were circulated widely, primarily via the Leading Edge database of contacts and eShots to Business Link’s Leicestershire client base. It was essentially a win-win situation for the two organisations. Business Link are targeted with delivering a vast number of events each year which attract a substantial number of delegates and result in a number of referrals for its business support and advice service. The Leading Edge needs to raise awareness amongst the local business population and stimulate interest in its offerings of staff development and training programmes.

The series was successful with 134 delegates representing 94 different organisations attending 1 or more of the 6 sessions. Around 25% of the companies in question requested a follow-up call/visit from the Leading Edge as a result of attending the seminars.

However it became apparent that there was a need to consolidate the interest shown from those businesses attending the first programme of breakfast seminars. A slightly different approach, therefore, has been taken with the second series due to start in October 2009.

Rather than delegates coming along to a session, finding out about the topic and then, as is often the case, going away not doing anything about it, the seminars have been given a more interactive feel to them and are going to be run aligned to modules from a specific course.

By being asked to consider ‘live’ issues from their own organisations and to share their experiences with fellow delegates, attendees will get a ‘taster’ of what they could learn and subsequently apply back in the workplace for the benefit of their organisation. It is hoped that they will then be encouraged to continue this further by undertaking the full course or the particular module being featured in the session.

Case study 2 – Targeted Marketing Campaign

Initially The Leading Edge tried traditional mail outs and eShots on a wide scale in order to reach employers but this blanket approach proved to have a minimal effect. It was then decided to launch a more targeted marketing campaign in September 2009. A number of large companies were carefully selected and time was spent researching them with the aim of identifying potential areas where the University could be involved in their workforce development programmes.

A personalised letter was sent to each of the companies chosen (about 40 in total) and after a period of time this was followed up with a telephone call. However, this tactic resulted in very limited success. It was clear that an alternative approach needed to be adopted.

The Leading Edge took the decision to attend a major Human Resources conference taking place in January 2010 – The HR Business Summit at the ICC in Birmingham with over 500 HR professionals in attendance. As a supplier at the event The Leading Edge would have a number of prescheduled meetings, fourteen in total, with representatives from companies that have been selected and

7

matched up beforehand. The selection process would be key as criteria and information on the companies available to the supplier is based on their planned investment areas (a minimum budget of £500,000) over the coming 6-12 months and strategic business challenges they are facing. All the attendees at the Summit would be senior personnel (HR Director level or equivalent). An additional benefit was that the delegates consent to being approached by the supplier (by email or telephone) beforehand which provides ample opportunity to begin a dialogue to ensure that any return on investment is fully maximised by being able to ascertain in advance what the organisation in question requires.

What about people we know?

It is often easier and more effective to sell more to existing customers than it is to acquire new ones as described in the Ansoff product-market growth matrix referenced earlier. Consequently, The Leading Edge is working collaboratively with various departments and services across the Institution to get them to ‘warm up’ their contacts. This includes the Enterprise and Business Development Office, Student Support and Development Service, specific academics who are already working with employers, and the Alumni network. The advantage here is that these companies already know about the University’s capabilities and will hopefully already possess an allegiance and loyalty to the Institution.

Customer Relationship Management (CRM)

Another challenge is the need to focus on relationship marketing and relationship building activities. It is the intention to implement a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system. This is seen as being of paramount importance and will enable the gathering of relevant, useful intelligence about employers and allow the Leading Edge to go to them with specialist, tailored offerings that they cannot say no to!

“But enough about me, let's talk about you... what do YOU think of me?”

CC Bloom, Beaches 1988

Traditionally marketing communications have been aimed at individual students but for companies there is a need to articulate different key messages and benefits. It is crucial to demonstrate potential gains such as increased bottom-line profit, productivity, efficiency, staff commitment and motivation, and overall improved business performance. The focus should not be on what we as a University or the product/service are all about but much more significant and relevant is what we/it can do for the company.

A different language is called for but one that still emphasises the USP’s (Unique Selling Points) of the University of Leicester - such as quality of research and teaching, experience in distance learning, globally recognised qualifications.

Process is key

Once, awareness has been raised, interest levied and desire sparked, the next challenge is to bring employers to action. This could be getting them to say yes to the meeting, getting them to sign on the dotted line. Process is the key element here and from the employer’s or “customer’s” point of view, all processes should be as easy and streamlined as possible.

8

9

Work has been already been undertaken to map out and improve existing processes including the removal of wasteful activities. There is a move towards a single point of contact for enquiries; redesign of application forms to guarantee capture of relevant information, which then ensures that registration is fast and easy; all culminating in a consistent service that centres on the employer or the ‘customer’ and helps towards building a brand that is credible and trusted.

Employer engagement: strategic marketing communication challenges

Raising awareness with employers has many challenges, and as such the messaging used within marketing communications has to be clear, distinct, relevant and motivating. This requires a good understanding of the product and all its benefits and a good understanding of the market and all of its requirements.

Wider university strategy, positioning and messaging also has to be considered. This is easy when a university’s vision is to engage with employers; take the University of Hertfordshire’s vision as a good example: “As the leading business-facing university in the UK, the University of Hertfordshire is focused on developing new and creative approaches to learning, teaching and research with a commitment to adding value to employers, enterprise and regional, national and international economies.” ( http://www.herts.ac.uk/about-us/our-business-facing-vision.cfm).

But this is not the case with most universities, particularly more traditional universities where strategic vision and messaging will often be focused only on undertaking teaching and research, conveying benefits, if conveying any at all, to a student market. So making the employer engagement message ‘fit’ into the broader university brand promise and distilling the broader brand message for a business market can be difficult.

Separating employer engagement messaging from the university’s brand however also poses another set of challenges. Disassociation from the core product (the university’s research and teaching) by sub-branding only confuses the market. The university’s reputation and awareness levels will be greater than that of a sub brand and should instead be used to positive advantage.

Playing to the university’s core strengths and then translating that to the employer market through a language that is understood and through a series of benefits can help make the messages better ‘fit’. A core belief of the University of Leicester is that synergistic teaching and research; research feeding into teaching, the teaching experience informing academic’s research, creates the high quality teaching and excellent student experience that characterises Leicester. This can be translated into a benefit for employers: the latest developments in x inform the course, which enhances your employee’s skills. Distance learning education is another core strength of the University and characterises the delivery of education for the employer market. The benefit highlighted above can therefore be extended: the latest developments in x inform the course, which enhances your employee’s skills, and are transferable to the workplace immediately, (for example).

The success of using marketing communications to ‘bridge the gap’ between universities and employers will depend very much on taking a strategic approach to marketing and marketing communications. Tactical marketing solutions, unless part of a broader strategy, may result in short and medium term success, but to truly bridge the gap between higher education and the workplace will require a greater understanding of employers’ requirements by universities, and a greater belief in the value of employee education delivered by the higher education sector by employers.

I-CD UNITS – UNCHAINING HIGHER EDUCATION Kim White, Chief Executive, Intelligent Career Development Limited

Introduction

In 2008 the University of Wolverhampton embarked on a mission to change the face of Continuing Personal and Professional Development (CPPD) for employers and employees. The result was the creation of a revolutionary approach to providing low-cost, flexibly-delivered, workplace-based, market-driven, fully-accredited higher education. The University will be running a step-on/step-off conveyor belt higher education service to small enterprises, public bodies and individual learners that focuses on fit-for-purpose and up-to-the-minute learning solutions.

Summary

The UK has a chronic shortage of HE qualifications amongst owner managers and para-professionals, especially in small and medium-sized enterprises, placing the UK in an uncompetitive position relative to other G8 countries 1. As HEI’s have continued to focus on postgraduate and professional awards, and bespoke programmes, they have left these primary needs largely unaddressed. The University of Wolverhampton has set out to tackle these areas squarely and bring HE to the wider world of work in an innovative yet responsive way through its CPPD brokerage, i-CD Ltd. Using a field-based team to research sectoral learning needs i-CD uses this information to commission the creation of targeted, bite-sized HE packages, called Units. These are then made available to both companies and individuals. The Units aggregate into Modules and Awards and the individual can pick and mix these to suit their work aspirations and leisure interests. For many Units the entire learning experience can take place at home or in the workplace but includes membership of a virtual learning set using a blogging facility. The range of Units available is under constant development and it is intended that it will cover the full scope of every School of the University and the full range of levels from 4 to 7. Awards can be attained from single Modules up to and including full undergraduate and postgraduate degrees. They are tailored to fit the specific needs of different sectors and evolve with the curriculum.

Background

Intelligent Career Development Limited (i-CD Ltd) was incorporated on 31 July 2008 as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the University of Wolverhampton. i-CD Ltd was formed as a result of a project initiated to identify the most effective way for the University to build business in the area of Continuing Professional and Personal Development (CPPD). The University of Wolverhampton is sited primarily in Wolverhampton with other locations in Telford, Walsall and Burton. The University has in excess of 25,000 students undertaking over 250 undergraduate and nearly 100 postgraduate programmes. Just over one-third of all students are part time and two-thirds are geographically local (Birmingham and the Black Country). The University is also not new to CPPD work especially in the areas of postgraduate awards, professional qualifications and short courses.

1 Lord Leitch (December 2006) - Leitch Review of Skills: Prosperity for all in the global economy - world class skills - Final Report, HM Treasury

10

Mission

i-CD Ltd, as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the University of Wolverhampton has a Mission consistent with that of the University:

i-CD Ltd is an agency for the encouragement and facilitation of continuing professional and personal development. It is committed to being:

• Outward facing to public and private sector organisations of all sizes and types • Innovative in finding partnership solutions to the learning needs of those organisations and

the people in them • A driving force for the education and cultural strategy of the region • An educational hub supporting the economy through employment, entrepreneurship,

creativity, the promotion of learning and knowledge transfer • A source of personal development opportunities broader than career development

Environmental Factors

The United Kingdom has been feeling the effects of global economic recession which seem to be more pronounced in the UK than elsewhere. Whilst the pound has fallen sharply in value against other currencies, stimulating some opportunities for growth in export markets, the prevailing lack of confidence shown by businesses and consumers alike has led to a sharp downturn in growth and prosperity. Unlike previous recessions where economic decline was general, this recession is characterised by large profits in supermarkets and budget-priced retail outlets where there is continuing growth in employment. Equally, however, there have been and continue to be major redundancies in traditional industries. Car sales have been particularly badly affected and hence car production temporarily halted in many companies. Those industries that supply the automotive industry have been particularly hard hit. This particularly affects the West Midlands region. The Government has taken steps to stabilise and re-stimulate the economy but it will take time for these steps to yield discernable benefit.

Many of the major employers in the West Midlands region are in the public sector. Within the region a very large proportion of employment is still, however, in small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). Whilst the weakness of the pound has certainly been assisting exporting companies in the region, it is equally making life harder for companies reliant on imported goods. According to the Regional Skills Assessment 2 3, overall, the region has always been less buoyant than other parts of the country. Orders have been falling and reduced workloads have been leading to lay-offs and redundancies. Recent bulletins on the recession produced by the Black Country Observatory 4 5 6 confirm that there is significant economic decline in the region. Traditionally, the region has had a significant proportion of its employment in manufacturing. Over time manufacturing employment has been reducing whilst in both relative and absolute terms service sector employment has been rising, sufficiently in fact to have led to overall employment growth. Recent redundancy announcements, however, have halted that growth and unemployment in the West Midlands is running at over 10%, the worst in the country.

2 West Midlands Regional Observatory (2007) – Regional Skills Assessment 2007 3 West Midlands Regional Observatory (2009) – Regional Skills Assessment 2009 4 Black Country Observatory (2008) – Black Country Economic Barometer (October 2008) 5 Black Country Observatory (2009) – Black Country Recession Intelligence Report (5 reports commencing in January 2009) 6 Black Country Observatory (2009) – Black Country Business Barometer (April 2009)

11

Research also shows that owner managers are, however, sighted on learning that facilitates change and improvement although less so in programmes that are accredited (UWBS)7. However, there is doubt as to whether this group has appreciated the potential of accredited awards to create competitive advantage or if views beyond owner managers to encompass employees have been gathered. There is also considerable doubt about the efficacy of the application of learning technologies historically to broaden the access to learning and, hence, issues regarding both access to and familiarity with the use of learning technologies remain.

There is also a predominance of the lowest social classes in the local economy. The regional working population is ageing in rural areas but growing younger in urban areas. Ageing is most noticeable in the public sector and engineering and in these areas high levels of retirements pose a skills threat. Whilst the proportion of younger people gaining qualifications has been rising overall this has led to a clearer split in the working population between the qualified and unqualified. The former group are already open to CPPD but the latter are not. There is a particularly under-developed ‘knowledge economy’ in the region, further exacerbated by the tendency of graduates to migrate away from the region due to the lack of opportunities. The region has the highest proportion of working age (19+) people with no qualifications (15%). Furthermore the regional rate for people attaining Level 4 qualifications and above for the first time remains low.

The Market

There is clear evidence of a regional skills gap at Level 4 and above. Furthermore, there is evidence of declining prospects and opportunities in the region leading to an exodus of those with Level 4 qualifications and above. In the current economic climate there has been concern for the resilience of the region to deal with both the recession and recovery. Whilst the major public sector employers will endure the recession, the SME dominated private sector may not be so able, particularly as it is relatively under-skilled, particularly in terms of management qualifications.

The management skills gap creates an opportunity and, possibly, an exploitable market. The area of the economy where the skills gap is greatest is itself highly complex and heterogeneous. A recent survey conducted by Arthur D Little for the University forecast a rise in leader and manager job opportunities in the region of some 172,000 by 2014 8. Of these, 34,000 are forecast to be new jobs and 138,000 due to replacement demand. However, this forecast was based on trends that originated before the economic downturn. It is doubtful that a new forecast would be as optimistic.

The A D Little report surveyed Sector Skills Councils and used focus groups to identify three key areas of leadership and management skills which appear to require up-skilling in the region:

• Management qualifications • Specific management skills • ‘Softer’ generic management skills

Nearly 22,000 managers and leaders in the region have no formal qualifications. This represents about 58% of the total. Such unqualified leaders and managers are more likely to be in SME’s, female rather than male, over 35 and White (Source: West Midlands Regional Observatory). Particular skills performance shortfalls occur in the ability to set goals and standards, listening and 7 University of Wolverhampton Business School (UWBS) (2008) – Draft Report on Leadership and Management in the University of Wolverhampton for CPPD Delivery 8 Arthur D Little (2009) – A study into leadership and management training in the West Midlands: draft report to the University of Wolverhampton

12

organising skills, appraising people and performance, making decisions/weighing risks and the ability to think clearly and analytically (Source: Advantage West Midlands). Softer generic skills that seem to be deficient are problem solving, team working, oral communication, customer handling and written communication (Source: West Midlands Regional Observatory).

The sectors where there is a high share of employment in the region but where qualification levels are consistently low are motor vehicles, construction, retail, wholesale distribution, hotels and catering, and road and rail transport. Some of these have also been hard hit in the recession. Other areas where qualification levels are low but employment levels are relatively lower as well include air transport, agriculture, textiles, electrical engineering, metals and metal products, food and drink, and printing and publishing.

The Product and Service Offering

The UWBS Draft Report on Leadership and Management in the University of Wolverhampton for CPPD Delivery (note 7) also identified a need for short-term developments for both management structures and leadership structures. Initially this would involve the development of a ‘generalist management’ Level 7 core programme incorporating Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning (APEL) and blended/network learning approaches. This would require a rapid development of flexible, rationalised Certificate of Achievement, Postgraduate Certificate, Postgraduate Diploma and Masters programmes (all Level 7) in:

• Management (University of Wolverhampton Business School) • Specialist Management Routes (University of Wolverhampton Schools) • Leadership (Midlands Leadership Centre with UoW Schools)

The report also concluded a need for ‘a minimum number of work-based, block, face-to-face, e-learning supported modules or learning elements of the highest quality appropriate for experienced professional clients, based on existing modules where possible’. In short, there is a need to develop a highly-modularised format allowing employers and employees to tailor the content of an award to their particular needs.

The report also identified a need for ‘an integrated framework, in the medium term, serving “management” and “leadership” markets across the breadth of the University’s employer engagement activities’. This would mean having a set of core modules that transcended School boundaries with additional specialist modules created by individual Schools to meet the needs of particular sectors. However, given the skills and qualifications gap in management and leadership the creation of a structure and modules set at Certificate of Higher Education (Level 4) and Foundation degree (Level 5) awards would also be a priority. Furthermore, there would be opportunities for some modules to bridge from Foundation degree to Honours degree (Level 6) and for Postgraduate Awards (Level 7).

Given the evidence from the market intelligence it would be the ability of the learning programme to deliver improvement and change that is critical. Thus, the fact that the modules could be assessed and accredited is less relevant than the ability of the individual to access small and highly effective learning units that are of direct and immediate benefit. Drawing customers into the accreditation process is financially beneficial to the University but is not a selling point, whereas the flexibility of the product is. To that end, from the start there needed to be high attention to detail in the area of flexibility of choice and flexibility of access to the product.

The price structure for the product and service offering needed to take account of four separate considerations:

13

• The cost structure including design, development and delivery – including the costs of more robust front-end QA processes in design, a projection of volume throughput and a consequential decision on the recovery time for up-front costs, and an estimate of on-going development and maintenance costs.

• The price-sensitivity of the market is both absolute (simple affordability) and relative (in comparison with the alternatives). This is critical to the prospective customers’ perceptions of the value or worth of the offering.

• The sensitivity of the price with respect to other offerings available through the University including full-time and conventional part-time modes of study for comparable qualifications.

• The contribution from HEFCE funding as a result of offering open, awards-based programmes. This depends on the forecasts for the rate of take-up and conversion to awards.

The decision was made to develop sub-modular learning programmes, or i-CD Units, of 50 hours duration of study each. A 50 hour Unit is equivalent to 5 Credits on the Framework of Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ). Learners enrol on these as stand alone blocks of study and as they are recognisably components of Modules of 20 Credits within the University’s Degree structure they are eligible for HEFCE funding. Undertaking 4 linked Units (200 hours of study) thus constitutes an assessable 20 Credit Module and hence counts towards an award. Formal assessment is built in to gain a Certificate of Credit worth 20 FHEQ Credits, although this is based on an applied piece of work in the workplace. Such an award would be one sixth of a year of full-time study. The relationships between i-CD Units, Modules and Awards have been mapped and the price per Unit has been notionally set at £125, making the price for the equivalent of one year full-time (24 Units) to be £3000.

It is important to ensure that the awards are recognised to be a product and service of the University of Wolverhampton. Paradoxically, however, it is also necessary to be seen as pragmatic and rooted in practical experience i.e. not academic. The positioning of the University as a provider of opportunities that are practical and advantageous to the business community is central to the concept. The linkage in the branding between the University and i-CD Ltd is thus very evident.

It is doubtful that most potential customers have recognised learning as a commodity in its own right with its own value in the market. The traditional professions have long traded on breadth and depth of learning that enable the individual to exercise sound judgement and further build experience. Non-professionals often exercise sound judgement and build experience in equal measure but suffer in comparison because there may be uncharted gaps in their knowledge or they cannot authenticate its source. However, if they could ‘eliminate’ those gaps they would be able to present themselves as discernible professionals. A feature of the positioning of the product and service is, therefore, that it is a source of differentiation for the student and the creation of competitive advantage.

The Launch

A three stage launch of i-CD Ltd was planned. The first stage was designed to start the relationships with the initial strategic internal partners. The second stage was aimed at building working relationships with external partners. The third stage has been the launch of the new, branded products as they come on stream. The pace of this stage is essentially regulated by the ability of the Schools to develop and support the delivery of the Units.

Communications media have been focused on the needs of the market that they are designed to serve. Work is being carried out with each School to identify specific market characteristics and evident targets. The development of web pages is a current priority within the Marketing and Communications Strategy. At the same time work has continued on the criteria for market segmentation. This is used to identify both the targeting of promotion and appropriate media. The

14

15

progressive promotion and associated communications support is a constant iterative process designed to give total coverage of the market across a specified timeline.

Contact with companies commenced in July 2009. Initial contact into prospective clients is via a call centre which establishes leads into organisations based on a specification by location, sector, size etc provided by i-CD Ltd. They create a diary of appointments for the i-CD Learning Consultants in a hosted Goldmine-based marketing database and calendar licensed to i-CD Ltd. Thus the Learning Consultants’ time usage is maximised and they are informed fully of all critical details of new leads prior to each visit.

The first visits into each sector are in order to research the market requirements. This leads to the commissioning of the Schools of the University to create i-CD Units to fit specific sectoral needs. Once these solutions are ready the Learning Consultants switch into a sales visit mode of operation.

The business format requires a full-time peripatetic resource of Learning Consultants, who are competent to promote the product and service to the target markets, engage with prospects on how the product and service match their needs and close sales and process orders up front. The second aspect of the customer interface is the creation of a drop-in/call centre approach whereby individuals can telephone or call in person in order to make simple inquiries, schedule business appointments or even directly seek advice on learning programmes, qualifications and enrolments.

Conclusion

At the time of the November 2009 UVAC Conference i-CD Units were just emerging into the market place. This paper effectively addresses the issues in establishing a product and service offering of this nature. By the time of the next conference it should be possible to evaluate and report on the effectiveness of the approach in meeting the market needs whilst realising the service and commercial aspirations of the university.

MIND THE GAP! A LEARNING JOURNEY IN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Helen Corkill and Steve Kendall, University of Bedfordshire and Concepta Palk, CPC Ltd

‘Education and training does not stop when you finish a great education, life is a journey of learning’.1 Introduction

This paper outlines a journey that started some two years ago in Luton. While it would be true to say that we are not yet approaching a final destination, the journey which we set out on at that time has turned out to be a very different one from that which was first imagined. While the term ‘learning journey’ is perhaps currently more often to be found in initiatives relating to the younger sectors of the educational system, in this case it applies fittingly to the higher education sector. This learning journey is also unusual in that the first leg of the expedition has been undertaken not by students, but by university staff and employers. It is also less usual in that while what is presented here is an attempt to address employers’ needs, it is very much a journey into university engagement rather than employer engagement.

Point of origin: surveying the general landscape

In considering the prospects for better definition and diagnosis of employers’ needs for workforce development and of the prospects for more responsive higher education provision, some acknowledgement of the economic and policy environment is required. Writing in 2010, we are reminded that this is the target year for achieving 50% participation in at least some elements of higher education for everybody between the ages of 18 and 30. We are also only a decade away from the ambitious Leitch target of 40% (Leitch, 2006) of the workforce being qualified to level 4.

The prospects for either ambition however seem relatively bleak. Recession, weak recovery, dramatic levels of government debt, cuts in higher education funding and constraints on recruitment to advanced level courses all converge to pose a profound challenge to our hopes of a more highly skilled and competitive workforce. And yet the necessity remains. As Ambition 2020 (UKCES, 2009) states, too few of our enterprises are in high skill areas, employer demand for high level skills remains too low fully to drive the recovery, too small a proportion of the workforce has the levels of skill needed to progress in work and there is too little integration of our employment practice, skills needs and qualification frameworks.

Locating the gaps

The motivation for this particular journey came when in early 2008, Luton Borough Council (LBC) started to carry out a systematic review of its large and diverse provision. Like many other organisations, a series of skills gaps and therefore skills needs were identified, including both employer and employee skills requirements. LBC had already embarked on implementing a new plan, the Gold Award Scheme, to recognise and deliver all levels of skills, training and education up to and including post-graduate awards. The Council then invited the University of Bedfordshire to help review the skills shortages identified and to look at ways in which higher level learning could be offered by the University to enhance the designated areas.

Working together, the University and LBC first mapped the Award Scheme against the University’s current provision. What was eventually identified was a spiky profile of higher skills gaps within LBC and a mixed profile of allied provision within the University. The majority of the identified skills gaps were at levels 4 and 5, with graduate entry schemes and post-graduate opportunities covering levels

1 (Anon)

16

6 and 7 to a much greater extent. While the University’s existing provision could address some of the identified areas at levels 4 and 5, particularly with regard to some specialist short courses, it was also recognised that there were inherent challenges for LBC in the flexibility and subject orientation of the University’s current offer. However, one area that was specifically identified for development was Environmental Health. This was a challenge for the University as while it did not offer Environmental Health as a discrete subject area, it did offer many of the key components, including Public Health, law, and bio-medical sciences.

Planning the journey

Environmental Health has been identified as an area of occupational skills shortage for Local Authorities since the mid 1990s and the background to the decline in entrants to degree qualification courses (Gaber and Wardle, 2002) and recruitment shortages (Lewis, 2008) have been well documented. The most recent workforce surveys show that whilst the recruitment difficulties for Environmental Health by Local Authorities have eased in recent years, from 58% (2006)2, 40% (2008)3, and 35% (2009)4, it is still one of the top five areas for skills shortages, and so there remains work to be done to ensure that there is a sufficient supply of new entrants to the profession to meet employer demand.

The Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH), the accrediting body for the academic courses, have prescribed a detailed core curriculum (CIEH, 2007; 2003). Professional registration as an Environmental Health Practitioner (EHP) follows on from the academic study via the completion of professional examinations, which include a Professional Interview and an Experiential Learning Portfolio. Work-based learning, traditionally provided mainly by Local Authorities, is an essential part of the academic studies to support the development and application of core transferable skills for professional practice. These areas underpin the core curriculum, to promote the process of ‘dynamic updating’ by practitioners, and for progression to professional registration.

Negotiating the barriers

The decline in student placements over the past twenty years, together with an increase in job opportunities in the private sector and with other public sector employers, have been key factors leading to the increased competition for staff now facing Local Authority employers. Although some more innovative work-based learning schemes designed to address this shortage have emerged in recent years, it is clear that that the difficulties in providing sufficient numbers of placements, and support funding to enable students to undertake those that are available remain. This continues to hinder access to the full professional qualification. Due to the dependency on Local Authorities for work-based learning opportunities under the traditional model, it is likely that these difficulties will persist in the current economic climate.

There are other changes on the horizon which need to be taken account in developing new course provision, so as to ensure that courses can be adapted appropriately, and to reflect current professional practice. These include changing perceptions of the role of regulators, new professional competency frameworks, and new models of service delivery for Local Authorities in response to the ongoing search for efficiencies.

Early dialogue between the University of Bedfordshire and local employers identified that along with the recruitment of new professionals, there were also barriers for career progression for staff already in employment in a variety of support roles in Environmental Health and allied services. These barriers related to access, flexibility and costs in taking up existing provision for in-service staff as well 2 Local Government Pay and Workforce Strategy Survey 2006. LGA, IDeA & LGE 3 Local Government Pay and Workforce Survey 2008. LGA, IDeA & LGE 4 Local Government Workforce Survey 2009. LGA, IDeA & LGE

17

as new entrants. Furthermore the pattern of existing course provision for the work-based learning element created barriers to entry for those working in other related fields of employment. It is recognised that drawing entrants from a variety of backgrounds provides a richness within the profession, but opportunities for this to be realised were in practice limited. From this early dialogue it emerged that the local employers group wanted both full and part-time higher education courses, an option for a Foundation degree route, access to higher education provision within the East of England geographical area, and to optimise the use of their staff development budgets.

Setting out

It was identified further that the local employers wanted to see the development of a more integrated way of working between higher education institutions and themselves as employers. They were keen to be more involved in the development and provision of local higher education courses to help ensure their changing needs were met, to contribute to course relevancy, and to help ensure that students become part of the local practitioner community at an early stage. The employers felt that the ongoing engagement in the course by local practitioners would more firmly root the course in current professional practice as well as help to identify and strengthen linkages with external continuing professional development (CPD) programmes provided regionally.

In short, Environmental Health suffers from a national and regional recruitment shortfall, and there are undoubtedly identified barriers to progression from within existing workforces. Continuing discussion with LBC therefore suggested that the skills gaps involved in Environmental Health were greater than those of one employer, so through a regional consortium, a group of employers representing five local authorities was brought together with University staff drawn from across three faculties. Later, while keeping a core development team, this initial group was broadened still further to include private sector employers and graduate recruiters. National, regional and local skills issues have been explored together, amalgamating information from the employers themselves with secondary information from East of England, government and academic sources.

On bringing together the representatives of these five employers with the relevant departmental and faculty heads within the University, it was realised that a very complex picture was emerging. Therefore, at a very early stage, the professional body was brought in to advise and has subsequently worked with the group all the way. An iterative process was jointly undertaken, bringing together the requirements of the new, very full and detailed professional body curriculum in a scaffolded and flexible model, providing innovative, multi-mode routes into and through the profession from Foundation degree to Masters level.

Along the way

Whilst the provision of a course in the East Region would provide a boost for skills development opportunities regionally, it would also provide more opportunities to develop partnership working with private sector employers, both for course design and development and for work-based learning placements. The more usual model for work-based learning for full time students with Local Authorities is placements of 9-12 months taken as a study block during the course or ‘end-on’. The skills-based foundation of the course, along with the technical disciplines content of the curriculum sit well with developing shorter work-based learning placements with a number of employers, so students can build up their individual work-based learning portfolio which reflects a more diverse employer base and range of experiences, and provides additional challenges to students in applying skills and knowledge.

The CIEH is currently reviewing the 2003 and 2007 curriculum with a view to responding to national drivers on regulatory services, public sector budget pressures, decisions taken to widen their

18

professional membership, and the difficulties in meeting students’ needs for work-based learning in the current model for professional registration. The indications are that a more flexible academic model will emerge from the CIEH as the accrediting body, which could include a less prescriptive curriculum and more flexible approaches for work-based learning placements. These factors have been taken into account in designing and developing the current proposals.

Gathering momentum

What have we done during the journey to date that might be different or worthy of note? Very little can be claimed as truly innovative, and we would not claim it here. However, one or two small things we did have made this development distinctive. Firstly, this was a case of genuine ‘employer engagement’. We truly have had employers on board right from the start, plus the professional body, and that has made a significant difference. We held a series of meetings with mixed groups of employers and academics and welcomed all comments and alterations at every stage. We set up a Liaison Panel of a much wider circle of employers from different sectors and we have activated this forum well before the programme was even approved, so giving us a greater pool of critical friends on which to draw. We made ‘Vox Pops’ of Panel members talking about what skills gaps they had identified in their organisations, what they wanted to see in future graduates and what content and skills they would want to see in future higher education programmes. We also filmed representatives of the professional body talking about their aspirations and requirements. This has helped to present a picture to colleagues at the University who may be experts in their particular subject area, but are less well versed with the links to and workings of Environmental Health.

We have used our institutional Virtual Learning Environment through which to create a central resource but we also opened this up to employers and other external parties – a simple move perhaps, but it was a path down which we had not ventured before. As an experiment, we ran a focus group with recent graduates from a range of HEIs and entry routes to the profession and who were all currently employed by a range of different employers. We asked these recent graduates what they really valued about their own higher education experiences and what advice could they give to us to help future generations of Environmental Health graduates. This group of young Environmental Health Practitioners were an exceptionally articulate and analytical group and as a result of their counsel, we made alterations to the programme which might otherwise not have been considered and at an appropriate time, we will try to take their recommendations a step further.

Arrival

We have not yet arrived. Our first cohorts of students are due to start in the Autumn of 2010, and it will only be after that point that we can start to evaluate what has been produced. Yet for once, perhaps students are not at the centre of this story. As Wenger (1998:73) identified, ‘the first characteristic of practice as the source of coherence of a community is the mutual engagement of participants’. We have here an example of the creation of an emerging community comprising both academics and employers, a community which has had to come together and has had to learn from each other. For the staff at the University, there has been, and there remains, a great deal to learn about applying transdisciplinary study into different workplace contexts. This has been, and will continue to be, a steep learning curve. For the employers and their staff, it is a journey into the different world of the academy, not altogether an easy world to comprehend in terms of coded language and what is undoubtedly seen from the outside as idiosyncratic ways of working. By fusing the two worlds of the university and the workplace, however, hopefully a new and better- integrated learning experience will open up for future students.

Many of the travellers involved in this development doubtless believed they had ‘finished a great education’, but this onward journey has certainly brought new challenges for us all.

19

References

CIEH (2003) A Curriculum for Courses Leading to the Registration of Environmental

Health Practitioners. London: CIEH.

CIEH (2007) Curriculum 2007 – A Curriculum for Courses Leading to the Registration

of Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs), CIEH, London.

Gaber, I and Wardle, A. (2002). The CLEAR Report. London, CLEAR Consultants.

Leitch, A. (2006) Leitch Review of Skills: Prosperity for all in the global economy-

world class skills. London, HM Treasury.

Lewis, T (2008) ‘Lets get Radical’. Environmental Health Journal, vol.116/12, 4th

December 2008. London: CIEH.

UKCES (2009) Ambition 2020: World Class Skills and Jobs for the UK. Wath-upon-

Dearne, UKCES.

Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity.

Cambridge, CUP.

20

BRIDGING THE GAP: MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY BUSINESS SCHOOL AND THE RECRUITMENT & EMPLOYMENT CONFEDERATION (REC) Dr Philip Frame, Director of Work Based Learning Programmes, Middlesex University Business School and John Cunningham, Head of Qualifications, Recruitment & Employment Confederation (REC)

Introduction

This paper provides a case study which outlines the development of an effective working relationship between Middlesex University Business School (the Business School) and the professional body for the recruitment industry, the Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC). It highlights the issues involved in the operating of such a partnership, particularly in respect of the changes required of students who progress from the REC programme onto the Business School top up programme and also the development of how the Business School manages the delivery and administration of its academic provision. After providing a snapshot of each organisation, we explore the challenges for the students and the development opportunities that this partnership provides.

The Partners

Middlesex University Business School (the Business School) is based in West London. It comprises six departments: Accounting and Finance, Business and Management, Economics and Statistics, Human Resource Management, Law and Marketing. The student body is large and international, with over 3,500 undergraduates, over 1,300 postgraduates, and 60 doctoral students. In addition, around 500 students and members of client organisations follow short professional courses annually. The school works in partnership with major corporations, small businesses, and professional and trade organisations to provide in-house training and development, knowledge transfer and student consultancy projects. The university as a whole has attracted significant funding from the sectoral funding council (the Higher Education Funding Council for England) in recognition of its status as a centre of excellence for teaching and learning by work based learning. The Business School thus has experience of working in consort with external organisations to deliver organisationally or sectorally specific training and development; the university has an international reputation for providing such training and development via the process of work based learning.

The Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC) is the professional body which supports and represents the £27bn UK recruitment industry. REC's membership is made up of over 8,000 recruitment agencies and businesses (corporate members) and 6,000 recruitment professionals (individual members of its Institute of Recruitment Professionals). REC provides a lobbying function for the industry and a source of recruitment knowledge; it actively encourages the raising of recruitment standards and helps the development of individuals’ careers. The Confederation offers a range of one and two-day courses covering all the skills expected of recruiters and managers, together with seminars and Certificate and Diploma qualifications. It is within this last context that the partnership which is the focus of this case study was developed.

Developing the Relationship

The relationship was established and developed when the then Chief Executive of REC wrote to a number of HEIs to explore the possibilities of extending and accrediting their training and development programmes. At this stage the REC had two qualifications which were recognised and respected within the recruitment industry but not widely recognised elsewhere:

21

• REC Certificate in Recruitment Practice • REC Diploma in Recruitment Practice

The Business School responded positively to this approach and within a six month period a qualifications framework was validated and a ladder of qualifications was established, which extended to incorporate university level work. This resulted in the Business School accrediting the REC Diploma in Recruitment Practice qualification as the equivalent of year one of a BA, and then, as a top up, providing years two and three of a BA via a Work Based Learning (WBL) programme, together with creating the opportunity for REC students to study for an MA in the field. As a result, the REC’s portfolio of qualifications became:

• Certificate in Recruitment Practice (delivered by REC) • Diploma in Recruitment Practice (delivered by REC) • Degree in Recruitment Practice (delivered by the Business School) • Masters in Recruitment Practice (delivered by the Business School)

Managing the Relationship

The Business School is not involved in the delivery of either the Certificate or Diploma qualifications, though to achieve accreditation the assessment of the Diploma was strengthened: there was more of it and it was more challenging in order to ensure the participants had achieved the requisite level for access to year two of a university undergraduate programme. The Business School is solely responsible for the design and delivery of years two and three of the BA in Recruitment Practice.

REC supports and promotes both their Diploma and the Business School’s top up opportunities. The initial qualifications provide a stream of potential candidates for the BA and MA qualifications. In respect of the administration and management arrangements, REC is responsible for Certificate and Diploma qualifications, and the Business School for the WBL top up Undergraduate and Masters qualifications. Marketing the undergraduate programme is undertaken by REC in respect of their members and by the Business School for the wider community. The financial arrangements for participation in the BA top up programme are solely between the individual student and the Business School.

REC Undergraduate Students

The top-up students are all in full time employment. At the moment the Business School has 30 students on the programme, but 3 of those have interrupted, and, since 2004 when the programme began, 7 have graduated. Students’ ages are ranged between 23 and 54, and they work for a range of employing organisations: approximately two thirds work for small companies; the rest for nationwide concerns. They are widely geographically dispersed, being located in, for example, Guernsey, Portsmouth, Newcastle, Monmouth and Aberdeenshire.

Challenges to be Managed

The first and perhaps the most significant challenge is helping students to move their pedagogic focus from a didactic one to a work based learning one; REC programmes generally fall into the former category whereas the BA in Recruitment Practice falls into the later. The elements of this re-focus are represented visually below.

22

Process Focus

The Other The Self

Content Focus

Figure 1: Pedagogical Re-Focus

Thus the REC Diploma, and in fact a number of University programmes, in the main encompasses “the other” that is, pre determined and relevant professional or discipline knowledge which is filtered by the tutor, such as the law of the land in respect of appropriate recruitment practice. This is done by transmitting the content of these laws. To ensure its diplomats have mastered this content, their knowledge is assessed via unseen examinations. In short, it is the learners’ responsibility to memorise the content which has been determined by others. The internalisation and utilisation of this content, though, is the responsibility of the learner and does not form a part of the REC’s pedagogic practice. The exception to this practice is the final project, where learners are in fact required to identify a topic of interest and apply their new found knowledge to its investigation. Happily, this final exercise provides a bridge between REC experience and the WBL one, which is now set out.

The top up WBL degree focuses on the process of learning, the focus or which is determined by the learner, or “the self”, both as a developing individual and as an employee who can contribute to the improvement and success of their employing organisation. The focus of learning becomes the “how” of our learning (process) rather than the “what” (content). These two concepts represent each end of a dimension rather than dichotomous categories, and our process focus relies, in part, on an input of content in respect of reflection for learning.

The corollary to this refocus is the redistribution of decision making power as to what constitutes an appropriate focus of learning activities. In this case, the students and their employer work as equal partners with the academic in determining what this focus should be, but always in the context of being work based. As a result, the application of knowledge and discovery of new knowledge acquire a relevance to the individual learner which facilitates both the internalisation and the critique of that knowledge in the light of the reality provided by work based practice.

Whilst working with a partner delivers a regular supply of students who have reached the same standard of qualification, the managing students’ past experience of education establishments and pre-conceptions of what “university” learning and assessment entails requires attention. It is a matter of real concern, even though the students have successfully progressed from studying a professional REC diploma. In effect, the partnership provides the opportunity to work with those who would

23

perhaps not have considered attending a university, thereby working in consort with our Institution’s and the Government’s widening access agenda.

For example, in our experience there is a real anxiety as to what is meant by writing in a way which is appropriate to a “university” context; in other words, learning our “professional rhetoric”. We, the University, address this in a number of ways. For example, we emphasise and utilise the wealth of experience students bring with them, and is, ongoing. We require them to demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the concepts and vocabulary appropriate to describe research activity by inviting them to provide a lexicon of research methodology terms, as a part of their assessment for the research methods module.

We deal with a heterogeneous group: they are geographically dispersed, as noted above, with a range of experiences, both work related and social. They work for a variety of organisations which provide differing degrees of support to their student employees. However, given the small numbers in each of our cohorts, the staff and the community of students, are able to respond and work productively with this variety.

The Implications for Development

This programme provides the Business School with much more cohort variety than is the norm, requiring much more flexibility in terms of academic delivery and administration. The question remains: is it cost effective?

It is certainly not cost efficient, in respect of student numbers per tutor, but it is more than cost effective in providing our School with a development opportunity for academics and administrators to deal effectively with students who do not conform to the norm, and who represent the cohorts of the future, as identified by the School’s strategic development plan for the of development of work based learning opportunities.

For academic staff, engaging in this programme provides an opportunity for them to develop and extend their range of proficiencies to encompass the pedagogy identified above, that is, one which involves and privileges the student in respect of the focus of their learning (work based) and the process of this learning (reflection in and on action). It provides the academic with the opportunity to become a partner in their students’ learning by facilitating the development of these students and their respective employer organisations. This approach to university learning is perhaps not currently as extensive as it might be

For administrators, it provides an opportunity to extend their practice to take account of students who follow non-traditional programmes which are not based on the academic year. An effective service for those studying such programmes includes a responsive approach to the processes of registration, induction, assessment and progression. To do so will require a greater degree of flexibility than is perhaps currently the norm.

Conclusion and the Future

The association provides real opportunities for the Business School to extend its practice both in terms of its academic provision and the administration of this provision, as well as providing REC with academic credibility for its diploma.

In respect of the programme which is the focus of this case study, whilst there has been substantial student interest, the numbers enrolled have not been as many as anticipated. This undoubtedly has something to do with the industry; recruiters do not traditionally place a high value on their own qualifications. The recent “downturn” has also had a negative effect. As a result, there is a need for the REC and the Business School to work together more effectively to raise awareness amongst recruiters of the availability and value of these qualifications, and then to coordinate marketing and

24

25

advertising activities more successfully. There are nearly 100,000 people working in the UK in recruitment roles and so the potential is huge.

More generally, our partnership has led to a number of mutually supportive developments. For example, REC has agreed to provide consulting opportunities for our second year undergraduate students and the Business School has been invited to advise REC on the content of their staff development programme. Our association is mutually supportive, extends beyond a particular programme and provides opportunities for organisationally specific and collective development in response to changes in our external environment.

Note: this case study was developed with the help of Anna Kyprianou, Dean of the Business School, Dr Heather Clay, Associate Dean for Academic Development, the Business School and Judith Armatage, Director of Professional Development, The Recruitment and Employment Confederation.

THE RURAL EMPLOYER ENGAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT NETWORK: LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE FIRST YEAR OF THE PROJECT Lydia Arnold and Liz Warr, Harper Adams University College and Jenny Newlyn, Royal Agricultural College

Introduction

The Rural Employer Engagement Development Network (REEDNet) is a unique collaborative project that seeks to work in the rural sector to expand higher education provision through a coordinated approach to the promotion of higher level and transferable skills. The ultimate target defined for the £4 million of HEFCE development funding is the generation of 450 full time equivalent students across the three year life of the project (beginning 2008). The funding is earmarked for co-funding employer engagement learners and for development work associated with new work-based learning initiatives.

The project is led by Harper Adams University College and the Royal Agricultural College. By the end of its first year REEDNet had achieved 167 (against a target of 169) additional full time equivalent students through employer engagements.

This paper offers a portrait of the REEDNet project at the end of its first year; it is informed by practice, particularly by REEDNet team discussions and internal reports. The paper aims to disseminate some of the experiences from the project in the hope that they will be useful to others.

First, the paper outlines the context in which the project operates and describes the partially transferrable rationale for the unique network arrangement. Second, the paper describes some of the emerging structures and operational procedures that have been developed. Finally the paper goes on to identify some of the challenges faced by, and remaining for REEDNet and examines the approaches being taken in response.

Context

Agriculture and related industries have traditionally been supported by specialist agricultural institutions and university departments. Diversification in the industry has led to similar diversification in educational provision with the emergence of the term ‘land-based studies’ to describe courses related to the multi-faceted use of land (for example for conservation and recreation in addition to food production).

Statistics indicate that;

• 12,000 FTE students study land-based higher education courses • 40% of these are in the further education sector (in small specialist institutions or,

increasingly, at discrete campuses in larger general FECs) • 20% are in three specialist HEIs (the monotechnics):- Harper Adams University College,

Royal Agricultural College and Writtle College • 40% study in departments within multi-faculty universities

The FECs and specialist HEIs have a long history of collaboration, through their exceptionally strong links with industry, close work with the Sector Skills Council, Lantra and their membership of Landex - a subscription based association designed for mutual support, quality improvement and as a political voice for the sector. Inevitably there is also competition between member institutions in the contexts of student recruitment and hard fought social and sporting rivalry!

In 2005 land-based studies provision was identified as being strategically important to the nation. Whilst only accounting for a small proportion of GDP and employment its potential to contribute to solutions for environmental challenges and to support other industries such as food processing and

26

leisure is high. However the area of study was also deemed to be vulnerable because of perceived potential fragility in the balance between supply and demand.

A further, highly focused review by HEFCE appointed consultants (JM Consulting and SQW Ltd, 2007) concluded that land-based provision per se was not presently under threat but that action will be needed to ensure future provision remains strong. The review recommended the development of a culture of support between providers, the forming of collaborative relationships to share resources, reduce costs and therefore increase sustainability and for the sector to develop accreditation and quality assurance procedures which recognise the specific issues surrounding land based studies. HEFCE was encouraged to look favourably on proposals endorsing these aims.

REEDNet project rationale

REEDNet can be seen to have been driven by three distinct drivers. First it was motivated by the desire to address calls (from government and academics alike) for an increase in higher level skills across the economy, for a higher education provision to be aligned with economic need, and for greater engagement with employers. These well charted influences (see for example BIS, 2009; Braham & Pickering, 2007; Campbell, 2008; Leitch, 2006) have been significant in a range of recent employer engagement projects across higher education and are not considered at length here.

The second driver for the REEDNet project was rooted in the desire of the lead institutions to build upon strengths that had already begun to develop in the area of work-based learning. Prior to 2008 both institutions had begun to develop initiatives with a range of employers; indeed the development of work-based learning had been a priority for Aspire, the Harper Adams CETL (Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning). Whilst the Royal Agricultural College had “a long standing reputation of providing education based on employer demand … delivered …outside of the accredited framework” (REEDNet Business Plan, p.4., 2008) indeed the institution ranked 17th in terms of income from non-accredited provision. The emerging expertise was well placed to further expand work-based learning.

A more distinct motivation for the formation of REEDNet emerged from the recommendations of the 2007 land-based studies review.

Given the specialist nature of some provision, the relatively small institutional size and their geographical separation, the monotechnics were seen to suffer from diseconomies of scale which could threaten their sustainability. REEDNet would have the potential to protect, integrate and sustain specialist provision which could be marketed and/or delivered by collaborating institutions.

Through the development of appropriate project infrastructure the two monotechnics would be able to gear up to work with FE colleges, encouraging and facilitating accreditation for appropriate provision.

The appointment of dedicated project staff would support interactions between the two lead institutions and Landex member FE colleges to build on existing collaborative links and address the need, highlighted in the report, to protect and strengthen FE provision of land-based studies and link it more prominently to HE.

REEDNet was underpinned by an ethos of collaboration between the two university colleges and a sizable network of FE colleges. Through the project plan it sought to promote resource sharing, expertise sharing and a means by which FE colleges could accredit their provision within a HE framework.

The development of structural capital

To allow functioning of the network there has been considerable development of the functional capability of the HEI’s through the formation and refinement of different processes, regulations, cultures of working, committees and procedures. A process of forming and developing these aspects,

27

referred to by Stewart (2007) as structural capital, was consciously undertaken to pave the way for increased capacity and new forms of provision.

Advances in structural capital which were developed or partially developed within year one of the projects are identified in Figure 1; some are considered in more detail in the following discussion:

Figure 1 : Elements of structural capital created in year one of the REEDNet project

Client management protocols.

Cross department joint working (internal).

Cross institution joint-working (external).

Curriculum: module and programme design guidance and documentation.

Dedicated staff resource.

Employer needs recognition processes.

Evaluative approaches.

Funding model.

Marketing approaches.

Quality Assurance procedures.

Responsive procedural infrastructure e.g. Employer engagement course committee, subject board and validation committee.

Shell framework for credit transfer and bespoke awards (development work undertaken).

Technology: employer, learner and project team.

Employer needs recognition: dedicated staff resource

A critical part of engaging with employers is the recognition of their learning and training needs. To enable the lead institutions to ‘get out there’ and understand the needs of businesses new posts were formed within each University College. Business Development Managers (BDM’s) were recruited, or moved from posts elsewhere within the institutions, to:

• Seek out employer engagement opportunities. • Initiate and progress initiatives. • Liaise between employers, academics, financial staff and bodies, sector skills councils, local

networks, private training providers and other stakeholders in the development of opportunities.

• Promote internal awareness of work-based learning (and particularly the REEDNet project).

The appointment of BDM’s for each department within the University Colleges was used as a way of embedding employer engagement within the institutions. Both University Colleges have business development managers that work together as a team but who are also linked to particular departments or schools. The common approach of the two lead institutions enabled mirrored work patterns, in turn this may be seen as helping build a culture of cooperation as the BDM’s share information and engage informally.

Whilst the experience of existing staff in their knowledge of systems and people within the institution has been helpful in advancing developments, the REEDNet team has come to believe that the

28

newness of some staff entering into this role has had real benefits, contributing to a more open culture and to the questioning of prior norms.

Responsive procedural infrastructure

To support the employer engagement agenda both lead institutions needed to be able to validate provision with appropriate and proportionate scrutiny which is delivered in a timeframe that reflects the needs of employers. Under the REEDNet project, provision would be validated by either Harper Adams or the Royal Agricultural College. This led to the development of procedural infrastructure in each institution.

In an attempt to facilitate speedy conversions of opportunities Harper Adams created a University College validation subcommittee (Employer Engagement Accreditation & Validation Committee) which is cross-departmental and meets ten times per year to consider modules and awards up to the value of eighty academic credits at any level. Awards over eighty credits require a full validation, but to date most employer engagement provision has been relatively low volumes of credit and has been dealt with by the new forum. The validation committee’s early activity focussed on the development of procedures. As initiatives came into the committee the revision of terms and processes continued through a process of continuous development.

An advantage of this subcommittee has been that each department has gained experience with issues connected with initiating work-based learning. Likewise the proposed programmes and modules and their proposing teams have benefitted from the range of expertise on the committee as often employer engagements have spanned traditional subject boundaries.

Associated structures developed in the first year include employer engagement subject boards and employer engagement course committee, again with a cross departmental membership.

The Royal Agricultural College is presently in the process of revising existing procedures to accommodate new kinds of provision. The Royal Agricultural College is focusing on an adaptation of existing structures rather than upon the creation of new ones. Sharing of the each other’s approaches has been mutually beneficial, even though the approaches to procedural infrastructure remain different.

Curriculum; module development and guidance

One of the challenges to members of the REEDNet team and staff across the wider network was to produce modules which served the needs of the employer yet adhered to University College standards. This was difficult for two main reasons:

• Documentation and associated guidance was aimed at campus- based courses utilising established institutional approaches.

• A wide variety of individuals, each familiar with different conventions and approaches, became involved in writing modules for validation.

To assist the creation of acceptable modules, quality assurance documentation was reviewed and adapted by each lead institution to ensure that standards for use in module construction were translated into a meaningful language and form for employer engagement. Module and programme specification templates and associated guidance notes were similarly adapted and rationalised.

To provide support for colleagues teaching HE in partner FECs the Network appointed a Curriculum Advisor. This appointment gave partner colleges a clear first port of call for consistent advice and support on curriculum issues such as academic level and credit volume when developing new modules and programmes to meet identified employer needs.

29

Cross-institution joint working

To complement the changes in formal documentation, Harper Adams and the Royal Agricultural College jointly developed a best practice guidelines booklet for employer engagement module creation; this acts a source of reference for all those involved in developing a module, including University College staff, partner college staff, private trainers and employers themselves. As well as the creation of a tangible support object, the project benefited from the underlying processes of dialogue in the creation of the booklet. Through discussion, informal exchanges of past experiences and predictions for the future, common understandings were reached and new possibilities explored.

Technology to support the project team

A technology based solution was sought to enable the geographically distributed REEDNet staff to collaborate across the Network. Given that each lead and LANDEX college in the network has its own virtual learning platform, any one of them could have hosted a virtual element of REEDNet. However a third party provider was used to reinforce the cross institutional nature of the network it endeavoured to:

• Provide equity of access. • Avoid one institution being perceived as being the owner of the virtual space. • Avoid difficulties with unwieldy institutional VLE registration systems.

A web based platform from third party provider (Huddle) has been used to date to:

• Discuss emerging issues, • Co-author project documentation, • Provide an area for critical friendship on new ideas and developments, • Plan events.

Use of the platform has not been consistent across the life of the project; however the facility has been useful for focussed activities or discussions.

A number of staff have also trialled the use of the virtual environment to facilitate engagements with partners, the experienced benefits in this may be seen in see Figure 2 overleaf.

30

Figure 2. The perceived advantages of using an online project development space (Huddle) with employer engagement partners

• Collaborative documents could be co-edited with full involvement of all relevant individuals.

• Discussions could be held about elements of the development with each member of the team feeling free to contribute.

• Development and discussion could take place at a time convenient for each member of the team.

• Deadlines could be clearly communicated and members reminded without constant intervention by the project co-ordinator.

• Additional communications to supplement information exchanges were directed; clear objectives were met by queries being researched prior to the discussion.

• The online environment facilitated an open supportive environment such that partners felt less intimidated by having this forum to put forward their point of view and felt that the access to documentation helped them in their own resource development.

• The online environment created a sense of community in the development.

• The online space left each member of the team in control of when they engaged with the material, the pressure to respond to emails ‘there and then’ was reduced.

(Source: Harper Adams Business Development Managers involved in trialling a virtual platform with clients).

Challenges

In the creation of the aforementioned practices and structures there have been unforeseen challenges and emerging questions.

Needs recognition: transcending boundaries

Institutions are wise to consider both the mission fit of employer engagement initiatives and the fit between their internal expertise and proposed developments. Increasingly complex provision configurations prompt some thoughtful reflection regarding the appropriateness of new partnerships and developments, questions may include:

• Within a network, how much alignment of expertise is needed between the accrediting and delivering organisation?

• What may be the place of industry experts in offering quality assurance? • How can a creative approach to curriculum allow the legitimate validation of learning activities

which sit outside conventional boundaries?

A creative and reflective staff base coupled with internal alignment and external calibration will, it is hoped help establish and re-establish possibility. It is anticipated that a range of external communities of practice will assist with calibration. The involvement of industry professionals at all stages of the programme cycle may help to allay concerns in this context.

31

Dedicated staff: roles and skills balance

Particular concerns relate to the availability of individuals with the necessary skill bases to fulfil this role which operates at the interface between industry and education.

At the Royal Agricultural Collage the business development manager role has developed into a hybrid one, staff have a mix of skills, those concomitant with delivering employer engagement, but also the ability to develop the curriculum. This has proved to be incredibly important in working with the academic departments. Individuals with this potent skills mix remain difficult to find and recruit

As yet it remains unclear whether individuals need both sector- specific and higher education/ curriculum design experience or whether a team with individuals bearing eclectic strengths, for example some curriculum specialists and some industry specialists, is the most fruitful staff configuration.

Curriculum: disparate credit

Much of the credit presently being awarded through the Network is relatively small in size. If learners are to fully reap the benefits of higher education credit, then the formation of a system which recognises the value of accrued credit is required. Work has been done in a variety of institutions (for example University of the West of England and Northumbria) to allow unique credit combinations to be accumulated and to form the credit for a named HE qualification.

The creation of a shell framework to serve REEDNet is thought to offer considerable potential in this context. This would enable learners to build a programme based on needs and provision preferences. Moreover if credit can be seamlessly drawn from different institutions across the network this will more fully support the collaborative aims of the project. The building of a shell framework remains a challenge for the network but significant progress has been made in recent months.

Cross-institution joint working: collaboration vs. competition

A key challenge to the success of the network is to wear away historic notions of rivalry between the two lead institutions. Mutual awareness of each other’s strengths and geographical positioning has enabled a mature relationship to evolve. Steps have been taken to promote a spirit of collaboration; however the culture of competition is deep rooted and may require persistent attention.

Two overall approaches to developing structural capital have been used by the REEDNet team to enable separate, self sufficient and historically competing organisations, each with their own well-established norms and structures to operate together cooperatively and through collaboration:

• Side-by-side development: each of the lead institutions has collaborated to adapt and shape their own systems and practices with respect to common goals and underlying principles. Side-by-side development is resulting in complementary approaches which respect and uphold institutional differences.

• Joint development: both lead institutions have adopted certain shared practices and approaches that they have developed together. This is becoming more significant as the team members at the two lead institutions are brought together in shared physical and virtual environments.

Ultimately, the REEDNet project may have its success measured not only by the volume of business generated, but also by the extent to which joint-working has been practised and embedded. Overall success will result from a good working culture coupled with high degrees of employer engagement. Activity to develop a joint working culture has included:

• The development of communications approaches • The negotiation of understandings about the rules and roles for collaboration • The growth of personal relationships to facilitate joint working • Joint development days.

32

Overall progress

The developments and challenges described here may be seen within the context of a journey which begins with early employer engagements and the formation of essential infrastructure, and which progresses towards a mature and sustainable network with established systems. Such a journey is illustrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3. The envisaged REEDNet project trajectory

Establishing provision

The establishment of infrastructure and staffing arrangements. 

Securing new developments and building upon existing arrangements. 

Operational Stage 

Business generation.

Rapid curriculum development.  

New challenges presented and resolved e.g. unfamiliar funding combinations.

The growth of partner relationships. 

The revision and improvement of infrastructure. 

Towards Maturation

Business generation activity. 

Improvement of existing provision.

Evaluation.

Research and dissemination. 

Widespread and deep joint working cultures.

Systems refinement. 

Conclusion

At the end of year one REEDNet has entered the operational stage, with the development of new business and the growth of relationships being the prominent activities. Infrastructure is now being refined to ensure that it best meets the needs of stakeholders and new challenges are being faced.

Structures alone “will not be sufficient for the project’s success; they must be implemented by staff confident in their ability as facilitators of adult and work-based learning and complemented by assessment strategies that promote and reinforce learning and development of value to the workplace” (Garnett, 2008, p.24). Establishing deep and widespread joint working cultures will be increasingly important and continuous professional development of the project team and of individuals in partner institutions will remain a central feature of the Rural Employer Engagement Network as it moves toward maturity.

References

Department for Business Innovation & Skills. 2009. Higher Ambitions. The future of universities in a knowledge economy. Available at: http://www.bis.gov.uk [last viewed 12/1/10].

Braham, J. & Pickering, J. 2007. Widening Participation and Improving Economic Competitiveness: the Dual Role of Work-Based Learning within Foundation Degrees p45-52 in Proceedings from the Work-based Learning Futures Conference, Buxton, April 2007.

33

34

Campbell, M. 2008. An analysis of higher level workforce development needs in the UK p. 18-21 in Higher Education Skills in the Workplace-Delivering employer-led higher level work-based learning. The abridged proceedings of the University Vocational Awards Council Annual Conference. November 2008.

Garnett, J. 2008. Challenging the Structural Capital of the University to support Work-based learning pp. 21-27 in Proceedings from the Work-based Learning Futures Conference, Buxton, April 2007. Available at http://www.uvac.ac.uk/downloads/0401_publications/Work-based%20Learning%20Futures%20FINAL.pdf [last viewed 1/2/10]

Leitch, S. 2006. Prosperity for all in the global economy. Available at: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/furthereducation/uploads/documents/2006-12%20LeitchReview1.pdf [last viewed 1/2/10]

JM Consulting and SQW. 2007. Review of provision for land-based studies Final report to HEFCE. Available at: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/rdreports/2007/rd09_07/rd09_07.pdf [last viewed 1/2/10]

Stewart, T. (1997) Intellectual Capital, London. Nicholas Brearly.

EMPLOYER LED DEVELOPMENT OF A HIGHER APPRENTICESHIP IN ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY – A CASE STUDY IN EFFECTIVE EMPLOYER ENGAGEMENT OPENING UP PROGRESSION FOR WORK-BASED LEARNERS Geoff Anderson, Head of Centre for Work-based Learning, University of Greenwich and Hugh Joslin, Director of the Kent and Medway Lifelong Learning Network Employer engagement forms a key part of Government policy on higher level skills, a key aspect of which is “progress towards a new relationship between employers and higher education” (DIUS, 2008) and (DBIS, 2009), alongside broader moves to raise the level of workforce skills at level 4 and above. This paper presents an approach to employer engagement that starts by allowing employers the space to articulate their demand for higher skills and contribute to the design of the product. The fact that employees, in this case advanced apprentices, were also involved in the process challenged a commonly held view of where apprenticeships stopped and career started. Recent research (CFE, 2009) on assessing demand for higher level skills identified key lessons for HE providers in addressing the needs of employers. It is proposed that the work presented in this paper presents a further lesson which is about the level of involvement that can be achieved through dialogue with employers and how business to business communication is such an effective tool in the process. The market for higher level skills varies widely across sectors, however, research carried out in the South East (Farrall, 2008), and London ( Grant Thornton, 2008) identifies technical and managerial roles among the most consistently hard to fill vacancies. This is the regional context for the work this paper describes.

The Case Study

Introduction - Ask any hard-pressed employer to give up their time to attend an LLN Skills Development Group meeting and the response inevitably falls into two general categories: firstly, those who decline, offering an immediate apology related to some sort of time constraint, and secondly, those who suggest they could attend but want to know the payback for doing so. Given the imperative of employer engagement, (Leitch, 2006) (CBI, 2008) and (DIUS, 2008), how does Higher Education effectively engage with employers and sustain their active participation in this challenging agenda?

This case study provides an ‘exemplar’ for sustained and effective engagement with employers and providers in the development of a higher level skills progression route for vocational work-based learners in Kent and Medway.

Establishing contact – Since the closure of the dockyard in Chatham in 1984 the Medway area has been in steady economic decline. More than 10,000 skilled artisans were directly employed at the dockyard, with many more being indirectly dependant on the ‘yard’ for their living. The area is now being regenerated under the ‘Thames Gateway’ banner with thousands of new jobs being created over the next 20 years. Employment in technical, managerial and professional occupations is forecast to grow significantly in the next 5 years. Currently more that 20% of employers who reported skills gaps in the engineering, manufacturing and built environment sectors report hard to fill vacancies at levels 4 and 5.

The KM LLN (Kent and Medway LLN) attracted ‘stakeholders’ to the University of Greenwich by launching a sector- specific Skills Development Group. The remit for the group was to provide a collaborative focus for the development of skills to meet future needs locally. Initially, a number of larger companies and organisations were visited personally by experienced LLN staff to broadly establish levels of interest and likely commitment to the group. Also, LLN staff attended employer group meetings (e.g. Paper Makers’ Association, Machinery Manufacturers’ Association) in order to listen and establish the current state of play in the sector. Once a ‘grasp’ of the situation had been determined it was decided to establish more formal contact with employers, including those from

35

SMEs, by bringing them together at the University. The inaugural meeting was held in the autumn of 2007. The response was encouraging, with representatives attending from companies including E-on, National Grid LNG, Wates Construction, Aylesford Newsprint, Delphi Diesel Systems, South East Trains, Dover Harbour Board and Thamesteel. Representatives from six local further education colleges and two HEIs were eager to attend once the delegate list had been circulated showing the quality of employer involvement. The stage was set, but the real work had only just begun!

Balancing priorities - To engage employers effectively, there has to be a clear and shared understanding of the objectives, priorities and constraints of the engagement activity. Much of the skills policy literature referred to in this study is discussed from the public sector’s perspective, but sustainable ‘engagement’ requires a two-way relationship built on explicit, and above all agreed priorities and trust. Establishing, managing and maintaining a balance of priorities between those demanded by employers and those of academia proved central to the function and sustained development of this group.

The inaugural meeting established strategic priorities of both employers and ‘providers’, with an agreed decision that strategic influence was to be ‘held’ by the employers. A second meeting of the group was arranged, and hosted, by E-on at the Kingsnorth Power Station, near Rochester. A one item agenda focusing on establishing the ‘needs’ of employers was agreed.

Defining need – Following what at times were prolonged discussions around the identification of individual employers’ needs, four common themes emerged. These were:-

• That employers recognised how business performance was, and would continue to be, affected by the difficulties being experienced in recruiting appropriately skilled staff. In some cases employers reported that to fill vacancies they had to recruit abroad

• That traditional FE/HE taught programmes, although often lacking in application to the job function of employees, did provide the level of certification necessary for their individual career progression

• That HE produced graduates who were not ‘work ready’ and lacked some basic ‘industrial skills’. (One company had shelved its graduate training scheme because of this)

• That those employees who had completed an advanced apprenticeship and associated technical certificate (commonly a BTEC National Certificate) were highly effective in terms of their ability to make a worthwhile and lasting contribution to the organisation.

As one training manager from Delphi Diesel Systems explained: ‘It’s the combination of practical work-related competences learned through NVQs, and the theoretical underpinning provided by the technical certificate, that makes apprenticeships work for us’.

A momentum for this group was gathering, with further meetings arranged in an attempt to ‘bottom out’ employer demand. The group had now been joined by senior representatives from three Sector Skills Councils, namely, SEMTA, Summit Skills and Pro-Skills. Also, representatives from BAE Systems and De-la-Rue were in attendance. The representative from De La Rue, based in Basingstoke outside the Kent and Medway area, had been informed of the development through the paper industry from Aylesford Newsprint – a good example of business to business communication working.

Reaching a consensus on defining demand in the more general sense was relatively simple. Employers wanted a model for developing higher level skills constructed around the following parameters:-

• A clear and well defined progression route for work-based vocational learners beyond level 3 (advanced apprenticeship) into higher education leading to professional recognition

• The continued development of specific job-related skills (competences) from level 3 into level 4, i.e. technical, supervisory/leadership skills etc

36

• Knowledge elements to be ‘applied’ to the workplace where appropriate

• Recognition for learning that is delivered in the workplace

• Much greater integration of theory and practice, i.e. between HE and the workplace.

In general terms the ‘need’ had been defined. The challenge, set by employers, was for ‘providers’, which included FE, HE and a significant local private provider, to develop a model of progression based around the identified parameters. It was generally agreed that once a model of progression for work-based learners had been established, the detail would follow.

Progression through Higher Apprenticeships

The delivery model – Opening up pathways into higher education for apprentices is an important and largely untapped potential for establishing progression for vocational work-based learners beyond level 3. Apprentices and other more experienced work-based learners are an important and growing group of prospective HE learners (DIUS, 2008). Of those employers who attended the skills development group, a number considered the successful completion of an advanced apprenticeship as a ‘terminal’ qualification. For others, the next step for some advanced apprentices was the HNC once they had completed their apprenticeship. What was not on offer was a seamless work-based progression route; there was what one apprentice described as a “glass ceiling”.

The concept of an “Expansive Apprenticeship” (Fuller and Unwin, 2008) identifies one of the features of an “expansive” (as opposed to “restrictive”) apprenticeship as a clear vision for progression to a career. This concept provides a useful way of thinking about how to articulate progression for apprentices. An expansive approach would focus on the whole apprenticeship journey as a career pathway, as a choice to take a work-based route to qualifying to the most appropriate occupation, whether that be at craft, technician or professional level. In other words, what is needed to break through the “glass ceiling” is a seamless work-based route through advanced apprenticeships through higher level qualifications to, if appropriate, professional accreditation.

Research carried out by UVAC in 2005 on apprenticeship progression (Anderson and Hemsworth, 2005) suggested that progression from Advanced Apprenticeships to HE is generally poor. More recently, the Skills Commission’s inquiry into apprenticeships (Skills Commission, March 2009) and HEFCE’s report on apprenticeship progression (HEFCE, 2009) indicate that this situation remains largely unchanged. Opening up sustainable progression routes for this growing number of work-based learners is currently high on the present Government’s agenda (UKCES, October 2009). Also, there are a significant number of employed adult learners who having completed an apprenticeship, have not developed their career further. Employers stated that this is particularly evident in the construction sector.

A delivery model was developed around the parameters identified earlier by employers. An additional requirement of employers was that delivery was not to be restricted to the ‘academic year’. Employers expected the model of delivery to operate over a 48 week year and should include elements of learning and delivery at work.

The progression model for work-based vocational learners in engineering and manufacturing is illustrated overleaf. The model is underpinned by support in the workplace and provides a structure to enable apprentices to reach their potential whether at level 4 with an NVQ and Certificate in Higher Education after one year (Eng Tech), at level 5 with an NVQ 4 and a Foundation degree after two years or at level 6 with an NVQ 4 and a BEng after three years (ITech). Linking the requirements for professional body registration (IET) from Advanced Apprenticeship at NQF Level 3, through to Hons at HE Level 3 meets the expectations of employers whilst also providing the much needed career development opportunities (CPD) for aspiring professionals. In developing the model, a balance between the strategic priorities of employers, (progression, coherence, work-related utility and

37

duration) the institutional and awarding body requirements (quality) and the aspirations of learners, had to be understood, negotiated and agreed.

However, the outcome provides a realistic and above all, achievable ‘goal’, for aspiring professionals many of whom have cautious preconceptions about HE. The model brings HE within the learners ‘radar’!

K&M LLN Progression Model for Work‐Based Vocational Learners in Engineering and Manufacturing

ENTRY

Advanced Apprenticeship

NVQ Level 3

National Certificate

Key Skills L 2

4 GCSEpasses at grade C

(inc Maths)

100 points from one A‐level, BTEC National orequivalent

Mature entry through relevant 

work‐based experience 

following interview and APL 

PROFESSIONAL BODY REGISTRATION [IET]

ENG TECH

NVQ 3

ExperienceMin 2 – 4 yrsTechnician Engineer

Higher Skills programme facilitating vocational progression through learning and work

I TECH

B ENG

ExperienceMin 3 – 5 yearsSenior Engineer

Work‐based        Part‐time Foundation Degree        2 yearsNVQ L 4

NVQ Level 4Engineering Leadership

+Key Skills L 3[2 years]

Year 1 [HEI 1]Core Modules

120 creditsCore module‐75 creditsWork‐based ‐30 credits

Key Skills‐15 credits

Year 2 [HEI 2]Specialist Modules

120 creditsSpecial mod‐75 creditsWork‐based ‐30credits

Key Skills‐15 credits

Hons Degree[HEI 3]

120 credits(360 credits)

Developing skills, knowledge and people through learning and work

Generic Foundation Degree in Professional Development

YearOne

45 Credits 15 Credits 15 Credits 15 Credits 30 Credits

NVQ3 + Building on Competence

You and Your

Workplace

Foundations for

Learning

LearningContract 1

Selected Tech

Modules

YearTwo

30 Credits 15 Credits 15 Credits 60 CreditsWork-based

Learning projectResearch Methods

LearningContract 2

Selected Specialist Taught Modules

Progression model for work-based vocational learners in Engineering, Manufacturing and Maintenance

The development of this model has not only provided a seamless progression route for advanced apprentices, but has opened up a new work-based route into higher education for A level, BTEC National and 14-19 Diploma students at level 3, and also for adults in the workplace. The model conforms to the SEMTA Higher Apprenticeship Framework developed with Airbus and having been validated by the University of Greenwich’s School of Engineering, will recruit for a September 2010 start.

Innovation – The Centre for Work-based Learning at the University of Greenwich has assumed overall responsibility for managing the programme. It has been recognised that for these learners a discrete and flexibly delivered programme is essential and that it needs to have a supportive programme leader. The School of Engineering has overall responsibility for academic quality and leads on the delivery of the named programmes which may be on or off-site. Employers have responsibility for the learners and delivering work-based elements of the programme including NVQs. When comparing this model with the traditional pathway into HE for work-based learners some innovative elements are apparent. These may be summarised as:

• The employers’ own considerable in-house experience of supporting learning in the workplace will be recognised, built upon and accredited through the Employer Based Training Accreditation (EBTA) process developed by FdF

• The Foundation degree will cover core modules but also give opportunity for work-based learning modules that can be focused on meeting business needs

38

• Specialist modules can be jointly delivered in-company by experienced practitioners at work supported by University staff

• Retention and achievement of learners is closely monitored throughout the programme.

Many of the participants involved in the work of this group have been keen to express their interest and enthusiasm for this work. This is perhaps best summed up in the words of Marisa George, Learning and Development Manager at Aylesford Newsprint, who has said: “Through the KMLLN and the University of Greenwich this group is playing a key role in enabling Aylesford Newsprint to “have a say” in the development of work-based qualification pathways that has the potential to significantly develop our industry”.

Earlier an example of business to business communication was described bringing a substantial new employer to the group. It was evident that apprentice to apprentice communication was also increasing demand for this approach. At the launch of the programme, a number of apprentices were in attendance including two from a company that hadn’t been involved and who went back to their employer with information and a request that they make contact –which they did!

Engaging employers in the Government’s Skills Agenda – In March 2009 the success of the LLN and the University of Greenwich in engaging local employers in this sector specific demand-led agenda gained the attention of Lord Young. The then Minister for Skills and Apprenticeships in DIUS visited the University to speak with the Vice Chancellor and a representative group of employers involved in the work of the group. Lord Young was particularly interested to learn how employers and providers had come together to devise a new pathway into HE for work-based learners.

Since this work, the Government has picked up on the need to develop further higher apprenticeship frameworks. It is arguably a key plank in opening up access to the professions (Panel on Fair Access to the Professions, July 2009) and DBIS has recently announced funding to support Sector Skills Councils, employers and universities in developing new higher apprenticeship frameworks and to “pilot new composite Honours and Masters frameworks” (DBIS, 2009).

The methodology piloted in this work of giving space for employers to articulate their demand through dialogue before engaging with providers is currently being further tested through work the LLN is undertaking with public sector employers from across Kent and Medway who have come together with Sector Skills Councils and the National Apprenticeship Service to scope out the demand for higher level progression routes for their advanced apprentices, including higher apprenticeships. Although at an early stage, employers are keen on the approach and it is expected that once the demand has been scoped out, there will be the opportunity to put in place similar higher apprenticeship frameworks to open seamless progression opportunities for public sector apprentices in the area.

Conclusion – The partnerships established through the work of this group demonstrate how the case for higher level skills can be articulated to meet both employer and learner expectations. It is worth re-stating the key elements for the meaningful and sustained partnerships that underpins this study:

• Strategic influence must reside with the employer

• Priorities must be agreed, maintained and balanced throughout the engagement

• Responsibilities must be shared and met by all.

39

40

Bibliography

Grant Thornton. (2008). Highly Skilled London: The demand for higher level skills by London employers for London . Grant Thornton.

Anderson and Hemsworth. (2005). From Apprenticeship to Higher Education. UVAC.

CBI. (2008). Stepping Higher: Workforce development through employer-higher education partnership. CBI.

CFE. (2009). Using demand to shape supply: An assessment of the higher level skills needs of employers in England. CFE.

DBIS. (2009). Grant Letter to HEFCE.

DBIS. (2009). Skills Investment Strategy. Department for Business Innovationn and Skills.

DIUS. (2008). Grant Letter to HEFCE.

DIUS. (2008). Higher Education at Work, High Skills: High Value. DIUS.

Farrall. (2008). The Market for Higher Level Skills Training in the South East. Heist.

Fuller and Unwin. (2008). Towards Expansive Apprenticeships. Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP).

HEFCE. (2009). Pathways to Higher Education - Apprenticeships. HEFCE.

Leitch. (2006). Prosperity for all in the global economy – world class skills. HM Treasury.

Panel on Fair Access to the Professions. (July 2009). Unleashing Aspiration. Cabinet Office.

Skills Commission. (March 2009). Progression through Apprenticeships. Policy Connect.

UKCES. (October 2009). Towards Ambition 2020: Skills, Jobs, Growth. UK Commission for Employment and Skills.

DISAGGREGATING THE CURRICULUM – FROM FULL MEAL TO BITE SIZED PROVISION Jeff Braham and Ann Minton, University of Derby

This paper looks at the use of small curriculum packages as a way of engaging employees and employers in higher level learning. Starting from the creation of a suite of Foundation degrees, and seeking to provide a pragmatic and helpful response to the credit crunch of 2008/09, the team explored structures which would unpick the Foundation degrees and reconstruct them in ways which might be more attractive to potential work-based learners.

At the same time we were keen to incorporate some form of APEL, in order to accelerate appropriately a learner’s accumulation of credit towards a fuller engagement with a higher education programme.

The work is still ongoing, and so evaluation of the impact of this development remains to be conducted. The paper incorporates feedback gained during the workshop presentation of the same name at the UVAC conference held in York in November 2009.

“The key ingredient for delivering the skills agenda is a credit framework, an approach that helps learners gain credit for the learning that they have acquired in the workplace. Then (they can) build on that through short courses at further education colleges, private providers or universities.”

Richard Brown, Chief Executive, Council for Industry and Higher Education, quoted in “Focus on Basic Skills not HE, say MPs” THE, 22 January 2009.

Context

The Foundation degree in Applied Professional Studies was recently approved by the University of Derby as part of the re-approval of the Lifelong Learning Scheme. This Foundation degree has already been used to define a curriculum for the events management industry, which has a series of entry routes, offered through a disaggregated route. It is therefore worth exploring the genesis of this academic product.

The generic “shell” structure was developed from work done with a specific employment sector – the wood industry. This original development was done by a team including members from the sector standards body (SSB) (which ensured that emerging National Occupational Standards (NOS) for the sector were taken into account when compiling the more specific elements of the curriculum), and several members of employing organisations and other representative bodies from across the sector. Indeed the academic approval statement commended the team for the robust nature of its engagement with the industry. The results of this work were a suite of three Foundation degrees, relevant to the sector, of which the common elements were significant, and so represented a framework which could be applied to any other sector.

The original development was funded by Foundation Degree Forward (FDF), as they saw the proposed relationship between NOS and academic standards as being a demonstration of best practice in the development of employer-responsive Higher Education awards.

However, as the programmes were being validated, in November 2008, so the financial “credit crunch” was beginning. This exacerbated a situation which the programmes had in any case been seeking to address, that the wood industry had not engaged in any systematic way with higher level learning for more than a working generation. We needed to find ways of addressing the likely scenario that whereas there may be a need for the development of higher level capability within the industry, and the Foundation degrees had been specifically built around the knowledge, skills and understanding which would support the development of this capability, nevertheless individuals and employing organisations within the sector would be more likely to engage with smaller chunks of

41

learning. It was felt that learners, who in this industry have not been familiar with HE, would prefer to have undertaken small or even “micro” credit chunks to build up confidence about their HE capabilities before committing energy and resource to a larger programme. Employers, likewise, would be keen to evaluate the cost/benefit of engagement before committing significant resource at a time of such economic constraint. These considerations echoed an informal mantra of the Lifelong Learning Scheme at the University, that although employers like the idea of Foundation degrees, “they couldn’t eat a whole one!” Such an approach is mirrored in the work of Fox, Williams and Smith at Cornwall College, where a similar approach was taken with the FdA Tourism, heritage and culture (FdF, 2007), and in the findings of the CBI (2008).

There were two other imperatives which also encouraged us in this direction. The first concerned the development and validation process. When HE programmes are developed from scratch, as these were, they are documented in a way which is required for academic approval. This leaves work to be done post-validation on the preparation of learning materials and other curriculum resources. An initial, smaller offer could be worked up more quickly and so offer a holding position while the “whole programme” resources are completed.

The second was external to the University. As part of the overall sector development work, the sector was promoting a credit accumulation model of CPD opportunity, and looked to collate existing industry-offered master classes and other training and development events and to promote and support the identification of new higher level events which would be accredited through HE or FE against both emergent NOS- based qualifications and the HE qualification framework. This model promoted a “step-on, step off” pattern of engagement and re-engagement by individuals, and used the analogy of a “paternoster” lift. Further, this analogy also presumes that each engagement with an individual part of the menu of the provision available moves an individual nearer to his or her personal and professional goals. (Such was the attraction of the analogy that health and safety considerations could not persuade them to use an alternative!)

With this range of drivers, we decided to look at how the Foundation degree programmes could be made available to industry through channels other than marketing the whole programme. It was agreed that we should unpick the content of the full Foundation degrees, and re-package it in combinations and volumes that would be appealing to the target audience at least in their initial engagement with higher education.

Academic Structure – a supportive model for employer engagement

The use of credit to define volume of learning is now almost standard across HE. In line with this structure the university’s credit framework requires that programme development teams identify individual learning outcomes for each module at any level, and thus the overall curriculum development process produces programmes which reflect the level descriptors that define the different levels of HE study and qualification. This level of alignment is still not standard across all providers even though it was identified as good practice 15 years ago! (Otter, 1994) This assertion reflects the conclusions of the Burgess Report (2007), and in turn is reflected in the Milburn Report (2009), whose Recommendation 30 proposed a transferable, credit-based learning system across the sector, precisely to encourage the engagement of part time learners. This recommendation was endorsed in the Higher Ambitions paper (BIS, 2009).

The Foundation degrees were constructed within this credit framework, and so 120 credits at each level were divided into a series of modules, with the whole of level 4 as a common curriculum, and the specific pathways defined by differential curriculum at level 5. Within each level, therefore there was a series of modules, all of 15 credits (except a 30 credit “double” project module at each level.) Most modules identified three learning outcomes, in line with university guidance on curriculum development. Teaching, learning and assessment strategies were aligned with the intended learning outcomes of each module, to ensure a detailed mapping could trace student achievement of the

42

outcomes. This was perceived as critically important for the employer partners who would ultimately invest their resources in funding their employees to undertake the development of higher level capability, and unsurprisingly would be keen to be able to identify precise opportunities for the return on that investment.

We adopted work-based learning approaches to contextualise the programmes and specifically to the definition of tools for assessment, so that each piece of assessment would seek to evaluate and demonstrate the real or potential impact of any particular theoretical input on a real world situation, task or problem.

We therefore had in effect a bank of learning expressed as individual outcomes, which were trackable within the Foundation degree, and also reflected the capability being identified as required by the industry through the construction of higher level NOS. The task we set was to translate this apparent flexibility into a reality.

The micro credit events that were being planned within the sector were intended to link, as stated earlier, to existing master class and other provision, offered through organisations such as sector training organisations Typically these events would consist of a whole or half day session, operated at a training facility within the premises of a large employer, or a sector training provider.

Curriculum Design

At UVAC’s Annual Conference we presented colleagues from a number of HEI’s with the Business Fundamentals module outline with the indicative content and module learning outcomes, and asked how they would disaggregate the curriculum to encourage access to HE whilst:

• Covering all learning outcomes

• Incorporating all aspects of curriculum content

• Maintaining the validity and effectiveness of assessment

• Ensuring coherence of learning experience

• Maintaining proportionality.

Clearly, it was important to cover all the learning outcomes so that learners could then re-aggregate the bite sized pieces to gain credit against the modules if they then wished to gain a Foundation degree, or shorter award.

Many colleagues found that the most effective means of disaggregating the curriculum was to divide the indicative content into 3 X 5 credit modules, accepting that it was possible that the learning outcomes for the module would be met more than once. The ways in which the curriculum was divided varied, although financial accounting was, in the majority of cases seen to be a useful discreet 5 credit module, which addressed a single learning outcome.

Similarly, the majority of colleagues grouped performance indicators and benchmarks together in a module, with policy deployment, feeling that this would address the first learning outcome “Develop business improvement strategies for a chosen area of business practice in a work related context”.

The second learning outcomes proved to be the most difficult to address in this method of disaggregation, as it relies on the assimilation of the various aspects of the indicative content to produce a sustainable plan for business operations.

43

Module - Business Fundamentals – Level 4

Learning Outcomes – A student will be able to:

1. Develop business improvement strategies for a chosen area of business practice in a work related context

2. Assess and apply appropriate sustainability measures to the business operation

3. Apply basic principles of financial accounting in a work related context.

Indicative content

7 Key performance indicators

Financial Accounting

Benchmarking

Policy Deployment

Customer Care and Logistics

Health & Safety and Risk Analysis

Micro Events

1 Business Improvement Strategies

Key performance Indicators

Benchmarking

Policy Deployment

2 Sustainable Business Operations

Customer Care and Logistics

Health & Safety and Risk Analysis

( + Operational aspects of Policy deployment and benchmarking)

3 Financial Accounting

Table 1: Disaggregation summary from HE colleagues at UVAC

In discussion it was felt that it was not possible to disaggregate the curriculum by the learning outcomes, or indicative content alone, but the two must be considered in tandem to ensure that the learning could then truly be re aggregated. We also maintain the importance of considering not just the knowledge and skills outcomes, but also the practical and transferable skills, which can easily be lost in content driven curriculum. A model which is wholly driven by the indicative content and knowledge acquisition needs to ensure that there is time and support for the development of such skills, thus the Derby approach is not to have 3x5 credit module, but to have 2x5 credit modules with an APEL element to assimilate and reflect on the learning to ensure that the opportunities for the development of transferable skills are not lost, and this also helps the learner to identify coherence within the curriculum, a further concern that had previously been expressed.

44

Module - Business Fundamentals – Level 4

Learning Outcomes – A student will be able to:

1. Develop business improvement strategies for a chosen area of business practice in a work related context

2. Assess and apply appropriate sustainability measures to the business operation

3. Apply basic principles of financial accounting in a work related context.

Indicative content

7 Key performance indicators

Financial Accounting

Benchmarking

Policy Deployment

Customer Care and Logistics

Health & Safety and Risk Analysis

Micro Events

1 Codes standards and benchmarking – modern business planning

Global regulations, codes and standards in the manufacturing and construction industries - including those related to employment and products

Routes to market codes of practice

Major drivers of regulatory change, including political agendas, climate change, sustainability and security

Benchmarking of performance and products

Expectations and preferences in supply/procurement activities – quality, cost and sustainability

Strategic planning for change

2 Corporate social responsibility – meeting expectations and requirements

Government policies – procuring the future

AA 1000 assurance standard

BS 8900:2006 – guidance for managing sustainable development

Environmental reporting

3 Financial Accounting

Principles of Accounting

Reliability for the user

Cost accounting

APL wrap:

To take account of customer care, KPIs and Health and safety

Table 2: Business fundamentals module with Derby solution

Derby Solution

Through the use of the Lifelong Learning Scheme of the university, it was possible to construct an academic shell for such events, so as to be able to recognise them for academic credit, albeit in appropriately “micro” amounts. A combination of reflection on the purpose of an individual’s engagement with the event, and the potential or real impact on workplace practice of the event,

45

together with an academic assessment of the level of the input during the event itself, enabled us to accredit several of the existing events during the period immediately before the approval of the Foundation degrees. It was therefore clearly possible to conduct this exercise from the other direction, and use academic programme learning outcomes from the Foundation degrees as the basis for the definition of new micro events. In creating such events we would therefore address the issue of initial buy-in to a whole Foundation degree for both employer and employee; employers would be able to gauge the effectiveness of the programme by trying a bit of it, and looking to assess impact, (though perhaps with a caveat about expecting instant results) and it would help to support employees becoming very new and unpractised students to acclimatise to the demands of an HE curriculum by providing an opportunity for incremental engagement and early recognisable achievement.

In order that such engagement would then be transferable into the degree without formality and particularly without erosion of the accumulated credit against specific elements of the programme, we decided to create a wrap-around APL device which would operate alongside the micro events. So each event would reflect a specific learning outcome from a specific module. Participating in three such events, provided they were linked to the same module, would therefore provide inputs relating to each of the module learning outcomes. Learners could then reflect holistically on the full module in real world context, using a structured APL type of workbook which would be constructed so as to produce appropriate material (when set alongside the outputs from the three micro events) for the module assessment. Thus we could create evidence of achievement in line with normal academic expectations for a student on the module, and so to be able to award specific credit within the Lifelong Learning Scheme for the module in question.

In discussion it was also recognised that this approach might appeal particularly to qualified practitioners across different sectors. The use of CPD points to regulate professional practice is common in some areas, but this does not translate into academic recognition unless the individuals compile a formal AP(E)L claim.

An example of how this disaggregation can be charted is in the diagram at Figure 1 (p.50). Here, the learning content of each of the micro events relates directly to one of the module learning outcomes. The APL wrap document would seek to contextualise this learning from the perspective of the elements of additionality which are indicated within the broad indicative content.

The APL Wrap

The following format would fulfil the broader requirements of the module specified above, and would therefore produce the evidence to be assessed through normal academic processes, in order to confirm the full modular credit.

1 Your organisation

What kind of business do you work in?

Does your business offer a service or product for its customers?

Where do you work in the business?

Describe your work setting.

Are you part of the manufacturing, service or administration department?

2 Your role

Explain your work role?

Who do you report to?

46

Who are you responsible for? (include here an organisational chart that highlights your role and position in the company.)

Which resources are you responsible for?

3 Benchmarks

What standards or benchmarks do you use within your workplace?

Why are they important and how do you monitor performance against these?

What are the industry drivers for standards and benchmarks?

Are there any relevant government initiatives or documents and how do they impact on policy?

What effect do standards and benchmarks have on your customers?

4 Improving performance

How could you improve the way that you monitor performance against a chosen benchmark or standard?

Is there any current legislation which affects this?

Are there any potential future developments that you need to consider?

5 Health and Safety

Do you know who the health and safety officer is in your department?

There will be health and safety information poster in your work place. - Find It.

Name the important areas the poster is discussing and say why you think these areas are important?

6 Change

If you were in charge what would you change in your department and why would you change it?

Is the change to do with tools and resources that you use or with the people that you work with?

Justify the changes in relationship to improving what you do.

Are there any health and safety or other risks associated with your suggested change?

7 Finance

What are the financial implications of the change you have considered?

8 Customers

Who are your customers?

47

What services or products or both do they purchase from you?

How would changing the price of the service or product or both affect the customer?

How will this change affect your customers?

9 Reflection

Thinking back to the time before the workshop: reflect on what you needed to gain/ know/ understand from attending it.

Think about any differences in your working practices now. Review the ways in which what you learnt in the workshop changed how you carry out processes or procedures.

Clearly the notion of credit accumulation supports incremental engagement. However, there is a justifiable concern that a collection of such small engagements would not produce a coherent academic experience when targeting a major academic award, such as a Foundation degree. It was felt that whilst the limits for this structure are not as yet enshrined in academic regulation, regulations do pertain to the maximum acceptance of credit for prior learning, and we would envisage that only one or at most two modules’ worth of credit could be gained through the micro 3 or 5 credit event route.

Assessment

When presented with the Derby solution there was significant discussion about the assessment process - with key concerns about the proportionality of assessment in relation to the taster modules - there was a feeling that by disaggregating into shorter modules, the amount of effort for assessment required to gain 15 credits was significantly increased and could in itself be a barrier to engagement, for both learners and staff. Discussion emphasised for the learners the use of the workplace as the source of evidence of application of learning, and that therefore it was perceived that learners would find this more accessible, and the workload manageable, given that some of the evidence for assessment purposes would be drawn from real work documentation, contextualised by the learner’s own writing.

Extensive discussion occurred about the notion of obtaining a Foundation degree by 5 credit modules - and this polarised opinion greatly, with some vehemently opposed on the grounds of the loss of coherence of experience and the ability to assimilate learning. Others, however, felt that it was appropriate to be able to obtain a qualification in this way, citing the ability of the learners to demonstrate application of knowledge and skills in discreet and manageable packages.

From the staff perspective, however, it was accepted that the quality assurance processes of marking and moderation would still need to be in place, but proportionate to the amount of students’ effort required.

Sector experts

The use of sector experts was something that the sector itself was very keen to promote, partly as a means of maximising engagement from the sector employers, who would see that genuine and relevant expertise was being employed to address current and relevant issues. It was also recognised as a way of ensuring knowledge transfer in both directions between the sector and the university. However issues to do with collaboration, which is defined quite rigidly in the Quality Assurance Code of Practice Section 2 (QAA, 2004) meant that we were only able to accept inputs from sector experts in one of two circumstances. Either the experts became Associate Lecturers of the university (the

48

preferred solution) or we would be looking to ensure that all responsibility for academic decisions were the sole responsibility of staff back at the university. It was not feasible to approve a potentially endless series of collaborators for delivery of the programmes. In either case, the quality assurance of academic standards was specifically retained as a key university responsibility

Tracking achievement

Similarly, it was recognised that tracking students, recording achievement and maintaining momentum posed significant challenges to university systems, particularly where learners were undertaking modules for CPD opportunities. The University of Derby is well placed to manage such engagements through the Lifelong Learning Scheme - a credit framework that has rules to define the route for curriculum development, and student engagement. Specifically it allows the university to recognise learning in small chunks and give credit for these chunks. However, academic validity is reinforced by the overall lifelong learning framework structure which makes clear that small credit chunks on their own (i.e. less than the university standard 15 credit module) are non- portable and not meaningful until they are aggregated with other credits to build a programme that can produce some form of Award. Further developments of the framework, which may align with this model in the future, would see the framework able to recognise credit from different levels within the same minor award. So a University Diploma (minimum 60 credits) would enable students to engage in a narrow professional area (such as for example podiatry), and to pursue learning at a range of different levels from 4 – 7, in order to develop specialisms and address CPD requirements.

Certificate of achievement

In addition to the module based structure above, we also put together a Certificate of Achievement (30 credits at level 4), to enable further engagement with the programme before final commitment. This reflected the fact that of all the learners who engage in the Lifelong Learning Scheme through the award winning Learning through Work programme, a large majority have been engaged on programmes worth 30 credits. This Certificate of Achievement is aligned with learning outcomes from the Foundation degree programme. In this instance the outcomes which were deliverable were those relating to the Level 4 work-based project, a 30 credit module common to all pathways, and the precursor to the Level 5 project which was intended to be the demonstration of participants’ achievement of high level capability in their work context, and through this to demonstrate value for money to their employers.

Through engagement with these two devices, participants would be able to accumulate 45 credits against the Foundation degree. These short course options can be approved within a very short timeframe through the university’s existing Lifelong Learning Scheme mechanisms.

Figure 1 overleaf shows how the engagement relates to the overall program.

49

Figure 1

Further options have since been developed so that in the most recent Foundation degree validation opportunities exist for two different Certificates of Achievement at level 4, giving two different routes into the Foundation degree in Applied Professional Studies.

Conclusion

The conference discussion session noted that the alignment of higher level learning outcomes and national occupational standards is not a new concept and there is much experience within universities. UVAC (2004) set out some guiding principles, and sponsored further guidance about specific issues of curriculum linkages (Hemsworth 2007). What is new is the incremental nature of potential engagement with this model. Concerns about the workload for staff and students, if acknowledged, in the curriculum design phase can be managed, when the issues of proportionality are taken into account – particularly if acknowledged in the development phase. Nor is it intended that learners would obtain a whole Foundation degree by this disaggregation method - although it is interesting to note that many at the session felt that this should be a viable option for some learners.

Planning disaggregation requires consideration of assessment strategy and tracking from the outset, with the use of alternative methods of assessment and delivery to achieve the overall learning outcomes, rather than a linear disaggregation along the lines of the learning outcomes themselves.

50

51

References

Burgess Report (2007) Beyond the honours degree classification, The Burgess Group final report, London, UUK

CBI (2008) Stepping Higher, Workforce development through employer-higher education partnership. London, CBI

Department for Business Innovation and Skills (2009), Higher Ambitions – The future of universities in a knowledge economy. London, BIS

Fox, Williams and Smith (2007) “Enticing Employers to engage through bite-sized chunks” in Forward, FdF Journal, Issue 13, November 2007

Hemsworth, D, (2007) “Designing Work-based learning programmes: how to use National Occupational Standards” in Incorporating into Higher education Programmes the Learning people do for, in and through Work, (Brennan, L and Hemsworth, D eds) University of Bolton, University Vocational Awards Council.

Leitch, S, (2006), Prosperity for all in the global economy- world class skills, London: HMSO

Milburn, A ,(2009) Unleashing Aspiration: The final report of the Panel on Fair Access to the Professions, London, Cabinet Office

Otter, S, (1994) Learning Outcomes in Higher Education, Leicester, National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (NIACE)

QAA (2004) Code of Practice Section 2 - Collaborative provision and flexible and distributed learning (including e-learning), London, Quality Assurance Agency, available at http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeOfPractice/default.asp.

UVAC (2004) A higher education context for National Occupational Standards A report by Stephen Swailes, University of Bolton, University Vocational Awards Council.

PARTNERSHIPS NOT PRODUCTS: A CLIENT FOCUSED APPROACH TO CO-FUNDING Jane Timlin, Business Development Manager, The University of Salford and Contributing Case Study Partner, Ann Graves, Organisational Development Manager, Capita Symonds Regions

The University of Salford was awarded £2.9M Strategic Development Funding by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) to deliver a transformational change project for employer engagement1. Focusing on the development of a suite of enabler models for employer engagement, the project sought to enhance infrastructure in support of employer engagement, and in doing so to develop an effective operating model for employer engagement. Particular emphasis was placed on the creation of a dedicated costing model for employer engagement. This paper sets out the University’s approach and experiences in delivering the project and considers the role of the employer in costing this provision. It is supplemented by a case study giving an employer perspective provided by Capita Symonds one of the UK’s largest multi-disciplinary consultancies who partnered with the University on ‘BusinessWise’ a postgraduate certificate in leadership and management.

Introduction

One of the most challenging aspects of successfully delivering employer engagement is the development of an effective operating model which meets both the needs of the University and those of employers. A critical element of this model relates to the development of an effective costing and pricing model for employer led learning, which enables universities to develop robust financial frameworks capable of assessing the costs and benefits of employer co-funded higher education.

Meeting this difficult but essential challenge is necessary to enable all stakeholders including employers, higher education institutions and The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) to have a clear understanding of the benefits and costs associated with employer co-funded higher education.

The University of Salford Approach

The approach taken was to use the project to test, develop and embed new and different ways of delivering employer engagement, in order to establish it as a core activity rather than an optional extra. The project provided the opportunity to deliver a pan institutional change programme at both a cultural and strategic level leading to enhancements of the University’s core infrastructure and business processes to enable employer engagement to form part of the University’s mainstream activities.

From the outset, it was clear that university staff from across a range of areas and at all levels needed to be engaged if the goal of the project was to be achieved. Crucial to the success of the project was the active engagement and support of senior level internal champions including the Pro-Vice Chancellor Academic and the Director and Deputy Director of Finance. Therefore when we developed the costing model and other enablers we sought to actively consult with key university staff in the areas of finance, business development and partnerships and to enable them to shape the new systems and processes. To complete the process input was also sought from external employer partners and third sector sign-posting agencies such as Business Link.

1 “Driving Transformational Change for Employer Engagement”

52

Underpinning this approach was the belief that employer engagement activities should be viewed as a mechanism for opening the door to employers and establishing a platform to develop long-term mutually beneficial partnerships rather than simply transactional opportunities. Experience suggests that this approach is more sustainable in the long-term and of far more value as it has the potential to improve not only revenue in both the short and longer-term, but also lead to possible enhancements in research, teaching, institutional profile and the student experience.

By actively involving employers in the delivery of the project the University ensured that the development of the operating model for employer engagement was a demand–led, multi-faceted and dynamic process, which was capable of meeting the different requirements of employers.

The project focused on the development of a suite of enablers to support growth in employer engagement, based on improving people, processes and systems.

Where possible a collaborative ‘team approach’ to the development and delivery of provision was taken to enable university and company staff to work together to produce a solution which is of mutual benefit and provides both academic rigour and business relevance. A collaborative partnership approach also ensures that employers are encouraged to make appropriate ‘in-kind’ contributions most notably related to staff time, it also enables employers to be part of the development and delivery process and therefore to better understand the university’s resource requirements when developing the provision.

Significantly, flexibility in the location of delivery of employer-led learning was encouraged to both fit business requirements for on-site delivery, and also to add to the university’s growing expertise in work-based and workplace learning, with the link also being made to the cost and resource savings made through off-site delivery via the costing model.

The importance of being client-focused

A partnership approach to employer engagement is rooted in an acceptance that employer engagement is demand-led and the ability to grow market share would be determined by the ability to understand and support employer needs. To achieve this, a client-focused approach with high levels of customer service would be essential.

Being client-focused in an employer co-funding context requires institutions to develop high levels of customer service, which are consistent, provide continuity and enable a positive relationship with the employer to develop. In practice this means listening to employer needs, and displaying a willingness to tailor provision to meet employer requirements rather than selling them existing products and services ‘off the shelf’.

Effective management of a partnership with an employer should be capable of identifying a number of additional opportunities both financial and non financial which add value to the relationship between the university and the employer. For example, these could include the development of additional training and learning provision as well as other activities not directly related to the service being delivered such as placements, guest lectures, references for bidding contracts and so on.

Finally effective partnership management should ensure that employer expectations are managed, and a relationship built on trust is developed which helps employers to understand both the benefits and the restrictions of working with higher education and ensures they are realistic in terms of what can be offered by the university and within what timescales.

53

The Benefits of Promoting Partnerships and Not Products

By focusing on client need and providing tailored solutions which are relevant and deliver business and organisational improvement clients are willing to co-fund provision because of the perceived added value to their organisation.

A partnership approach creates on-going relationships and potentially streams of income and in-kind contributions that are lost if products are sold in a transactional way. It ensures a high level of customer service and enables institutions to be demand led and allows employers to be actively engaged in the process from the design stage right through to the delivery stage and beyond.

Crucially it creates strong relationships and a sense of ‘trust’ which is especially important given that there are certain restrictions associated with higher education which to an employer could be viewed as problematic, but which if explained in context can be resolved.

This means that employers are less likely to ‘walk away’ the moment they hit a problem as they will have been involved in the scoping and are likely to have been given a more realistic view, and confidence in university staff to provide responsive solutions to any issues or problems that occur.

Finally adopting a client-focused partnership approach encourages longer-term relationships with employers through which further opportunities can be identified and progressed. This is important because employer engagement and in particular the ‘business development’ element of identifying and encouraging employers to work with universities is resource intensive and therefore a priority should be to maximise the opportunities with existing clients and their related employer groups to recoup some of the initial investment costs borne by the university in establishing the relationship.

Why Value and Price Matters

The key driver for employers when considering funding higher education for its employees is value for money rather than price, indeed they will often come to a higher education institution and view it as an attractive option because of the ‘added value’ they perceive rather than the anticipated price.

Price however remains important in all commercial decisions, and whilst higher education can and should prove additional added value over private training providers, employers still need to understand the approximate cost of provision early enough in the process to enable them to make informed decisions.

Early and adequate indication of costs and inputs from both the university and the employer is important because specifically in larger organisations, those individuals from employer organisations who initiate contact with higher education to discuss provision will often not be the decision makers. Instead, they will be human resources or training managers, who require an anticipated cost and value proposition to enable them to ‘champion’ it within their organisation. Any significant delay in communicating an approximate cost could lead to loss of business particularly in a tendering process.

Equally, from an institutional point of view an early indication of price is essential in order to adequately assess the viability of the proposition prior to contract. Whilst acknowledging that on occasions employer engagement may be used as a loss-leader in order to achieve more significant longer-term benefits from the partnership, it is essential not to under-cost provision simply to secure the business.

Valuing Employer Contributions

In adopting a partnership approach to co-funding it is important to be able to identify both the financial and non-financial contributions of employers. Whilst financial contributions are easily identified and understood, staff and employers need to become more aware at promoting the non-financial contributions which directly or indirectly may have cost benefits for higher education.

54

These include:

• Staff time in the development and delivery of provision.

• Use of employer premises and facilities can mean that work-based and work-place learning can be less resource-intensive and therefore can provide cost savings.

• Employers supporting the institution in other ways such as placements, research, guest lectures, joint bidding, providing references.

• Promoting the reputation of the institution.

• Providing an opportunity to keep teaching and research informed by real-world issues.

Building a Funding Model That Works

The rationale for developing a new costing model for employer engagement was the acceptance at an institutional level that this was a new area of activity with some unique features.

In terms of the functionality of the model a pragmatic approach was taken which recognised that employer engagement is a broad and diverse area of activity with different employers having variable needs over a period of time and for this context both a costing and risk analysis model would be more suitable.

An essential requirement of the employer engagement costing model was that it be a practical tool that would be easy to use and enable business development and academic staff to have instant and remote access, and for there to be no direct resource implication other than training for its implementation.

A partnership approach to employer engagement particularly in the initial development of a relationship with an employer can be very resource intensive in comparison to traditional higher education provision. Therefore the costing model needed to be able to account for this, and be capable of accommodating both a range of types of provision along with projections based on different cohort sizes, and the impacts of delivery on and off-site.

Some of the issues and challenges faced included shortage of data, limitations of traditional costing and lack of awareness of many staff of the different cost implications of employer engagement co-funding. Significantly the requirement to provide an estimation of cost early on in the engagement process was a challenge as traditionally moving towards a confirmed cost would have been a longer drawn out process including several different layers of staff many of whom would not have been connected with the proposed course.

To achieve this a consultative approach was essential with advice taken from internal staff from key areas including finance, teaching and learning and business development, alongside direct consultation with employers and analysis of research from across the sector.

Based on the consultations a prototype was developed and tested internally via workshops targeted at staff from the areas, of business development, finance and other staff who have an externally facing role. This was critical to ensuring that all relevant stakeholders were engaged from the outset, including academic and professional and support staff. Following the workshops the model was revised based on feedback and tested further by a pilot group of users. Following results of the user testing a final version of the costing model was developed which included a governance framework for its deployment and roll out across the institution.

The model was used to cost the ‘employer engagement’ pilots developed through the project, which included the ‘BusinessWise’ postgraduate programme in leadership and management co-developed and co-delivered with Capita Symonds Regions.

55

Key Benefits of the Costing Model:

In order to grow levels of employer engagement activity it is essential to be able to deliver a responsive and customer focused service to employers, it is also essential that higher education can negotiate with employers in a way that ensures there are benefits for both sides. A dedicated costing model enables both sides to gain an early indication of the likely benefits and costs both in the short and long-term of developing the relationship.

Specific benefits of a dedicated costing model include:

• Relatively simple deployment with little or no resource implications

• Identifies the cost profile of employer engagement. Specifically the increased costs associated with the development stage of employer engagement in comparison to more standard HE provision where development costs can be less but delivery costs can be higher.

• Model uses terminology common to other resource and costing areas

• Helps to mainstream employer engagement and promotes inter-disciplinary working

• Enhances the ‘Tool-Kit’ for staff involved in employer engagement

• Provides employers and university staff with a clear and early indication of the price

• The model takes into account the in kind contributions of employers.

Conclusion

As a sector higher education needs to view employer engagement and employer co-funding as an opportunity to create partnerships and engage stakeholders, and its potential for generating new income streams.

Cost, benefit analysis in the context of employer co-funding should not merely be thought of in the transactional sense of money in and money out, but should focus on the broader non-financial costs and benefits that employer co-funding delivers. Emphasis should be placed instead on maximising the wider and on-going benefits of the partnerships developed as a result of employer engagement.

To achieve this it needs to be acknowledged that effective employer engagement must be demand-led and requires new and enabling infrastructure and cultures which are client focused and deliver high levels of customer service.

As a sector there is a necessity and obligation to build an evidence base to enable effective operating models for employer engagement and employer co-funding to be created, implemented and reviewed. It is hoped that the development of the University’s operating model and more specifically the costing model can form a useful part of this evidence base.

If employer engagement is to grow it is important that higher education institutions are capable of recognising the true costs and benefits of employer engagement, as well as the unique cost profile of employer engagement.

The ability to effectively cost employer engagement activities is important because of the unique and different types of factors and activities which cannot be accounted for within the existing finance infrastructure. Therefore a dedicated costing model for employer engagement is essential not only because it can accommodate the different and unique aspects of employer engagement, but also because it has the potential to help all stakeholders understand and balance the risks and benefits.

Employers should be viewed as active and engaged stakeholders and partners and not just purchasers of one-off products. Employer engagement and co-funding are by definition demand-led

56

and in order for higher education to capitalise on this growing area the sector needs to move away from a product centred approach to a partner centred approach which places employers needs at the heart of negotiations, and builds trust and long-term relationships.

Case Study: Capita Symonds

Context

Capita Symonds are one of the UK’s largest multidisciplinary consultancies. They operate in the building design, civil engineering, environment, management and transport sectors.

They wanted to develop a standardised postgraduate leadership and management course which brought together their diverse range of technical staff and delivered a high-level of training in leadership and management to improve the organisation’s effectiveness.

They went out to tender for this work and received a high number of responses including one from the University of Salford. Although not the cheapest proposal received Capita Symonds chose to partner on the development of the postgraduate course with The University of Salford because they were convinced of the added value that could be provided, and in particular were impressed that we were listening to their business needs and wanted to work with them to jointly develop something which met their needs and which for us as a university was innovative.

What Encouraged Capita Symonds to choose The University of Salford?

According to Ann Graves, Organisational Development Manager for Capita Symonds Regions who was in charge of the procurement process the reasons she recommended to Capita Symonds’ board that they select the University of Salford were:

The University of Salford (was selected to develop graduate business skills programme) due to their ability to design and deliver a unique programme to meet the needs of Capita Symonds

The Employer Engagement Team – a key element in understanding employer requirements and supporting the design, delivery and evaluation of the programme

The joint approach to the design and delivery of BusinessWise – essential to success of the programme.

Feedback from Capita Symonds

We’ve had the right level of expertise given by the University that’s married together with the sort of need we have. We’ve had some real fun developing the programme’.

Graham Cowley, Chief Operating Officer, Capita Symonds Regions

57

58

Key References

1. Higher Ambitions. UK Department for Business, Innovation & Skills. 2009.

2. Higher Education at Work - High Skills: High Value. UK Department for Business, Innovation & Skills. October 2008.

3. Innovation Nation White Paper. UK Department for Business, Innovation & Skills. March 2008.

4. Race to the Top. October HM Treasury, Sainsbury Report 2007.

5. Draft Engaging Employers National Occupational Standards, Life Long Learning UK, 2009.

6. Draft Engaging Employers Qualifications Strategy , Life Long Learning UK, 2009.

7. Statement on Quality assurance and the HEFCE priority for higher education learning linked to employer engagement and workforce development – The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. (http://www.qaa.ac.uk/employers/QAAstatement.asp)

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank colleagues at The University of Salford, in particular Renata Eyres Head of Partnerships and Business Engagement, and Paul Ward Executive Project Manager for the Transformational Change project, together with their partners Capita Symonds Regions Division and in particular Ann Graves, Organisational Development Manager.

For further information, please contact:

University Vocational Awards Council

Tel: 01204 903355

Fax: 01204 903354

Email: cjm2@bolton.ac.uk

Website: www.uvac.ac.uk