JISC Project Plan Template - Welcome to City · Web viewJISC Project Plan Version 4 URL if document is posted on project web site ... BPMN 1.1 Business Process Modeling Notation

Project Acronym: PREDICTVersion: 4Contact: Pam ParkerDate: 25th September 2009

Project Document Cover Sheet

Project InformationProject Acronym PREDICTProject Title Promoting Realistic Engaging Discussions In Curriculum TeamsStart Date September 2008 End Date August 2012Lead Institution City University LondonProject Director Dr Susannah QuinseeProject Manager & contact details

Dr Pam Parker Associate Director Learning Development Centre020 7040 3047 [email protected]

Partner Institutions N/AProject Web URL http://www.city.ac.uk/ldc/resources/jisc.htmlProgramme Name (and number)

Institutional Approaches to Curriculum Design

Programme Manager Sarah Knight

Document NameDocument Title Project PlanReporting Period N/AAuthor(s) & project role Dr Pam Parker Project ManagerDate 25th September 2009 Filename JISC Project Plan Version 4URL if document is posted on project web siteAccess √ Project and JISC internal General dissemination

Document HistoryVersion Date Comments

4 25th September 2009

Updated following some institutional changes and the completion of the Undergraduate review which impact on the project plan in terms of focus, objectives and dates

Document Sign off from Project BoardVersion Date Signature of Chair of the Project Board

4

Page 1 of 35Document title: JISC Project PlanLast updated: April 2007

mailto:[email protected]


JISC Project Plan

Overview of Project

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

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

The University learning and teaching strategy instigated a review of both the programme approval and review processes to support enhanced educational development. This, therefore impacts on the current curricula design process. It focuses on the need for processes that are developmental throughout the programme lifespan enabling development and preparation for approval and where required amendment with a clear emphasis on delivery and the learning experience.

We recognise that technology will allow us to support this process through exploitation of our Business Process Management (BPM) capabilities that are available as part of our Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) for IT provision. Technology will also support this in terms of educational tools that can be used to develop the curriculum and learning and teaching materials. PREDICT will focus on curriculum design for modules and programmes with an emphasis on educational development and the student experience rather than the process of approval. The process will be based on principles, values and models that reflect the stakeholders who are involved as well as those of the institution.

This project will build upon work in a range of areas that link to this project. The undergraduate review is now completed and has led to a number of recommendations

with both short and long term goals. We have a three year e-portfolio and Personal Development Planning (PDP) project to

develop learner defined curricula and embed key skills and attributes within all programme areas, enabling lifelong learning opportunities and to create learners who are adaptive workers

We have developed an in-house management system for programme and module specifications called PRISM. There will be a review of how developments may impact on this and how it can be used to enhance the information maintained about programmes.

The Periodic Review Process has been revised with a greater focus on educational development and learning experiences and this is ready to implement from September 2009.



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

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

ObjectivesThe main objectives of the project are:

By August 2009 To identify our key stakeholders for different stages of the project To define City University London’s use of the term curriculum design process and what this

incorporates To analyse the current curriculum design process to identify both factors that enable and

inhibit curriculum design including interdisciplinary design To assess our existing technology support for curriculum design and the factors that would

enable and support a new process that integrates activities for periodic programme review and identify where gaps exist

To acquire any additional technology that is needed to support the curriculum design process To examine module and programme specifications produced through using PRISM and

identify good practice and areas for development To examine the revised Periodic Review Process for opportunities for curriculum re-design To share all information between other undergraduate programmes reviews in the University

so that there is some synergy between them To examine the data collected for the undergraduate review to provide baseline data for this

project and to avoid duplication of data collection Examine the undergraduate review recommendations for short term and long term actions

and the new process of periodic programme review for curriculum design implications To develop a process for managing the change to the curriculum design process and the

implementation of the undergraduate review recommendations To review the project plan against the undergraduate review recommendations and ensure

that the project supports and compliments these being implemented To disseminate the lessons learnt and good practice to our stakeholders, the JISC community

and beyond

By August 2010 To identify the project management boards expectations of the project and any activities

boards members are involved in To develop a plan for the ongoing evaluation of the project throughout its progress and the

process of change To develop a stakeholder map that outlines the levels of engagement they have with the

project and the appropriate forms of providing information to these stakeholders. To identify which programmes and Schools will be involved in the pilots for this year from the

undergraduate review recommendation implementation plan, the Strategic Learning Environment pilot plans and the Enhancing Learning Projects

To collect data from stakeholders involved in the pilots about their view of curriculum design, their principles and values underpinning this and their development and support needs

To research what other institutions are doing in relation to curriculum design including interdisciplinary design and tools to support curriculum design

To research other models of curriculum design that are available in the literature and assess their potential for us



To develop a new curriculum design process that can be used across the institution with some adaptation from the stakeholder data collected

To review the approval process and the links with stages of the curriculum design process To explore the current content and format of the module and programme specifications to

meet future needs of stakeholders To link data and actions from the implementation of the undergraduate review

recommendations to the curriculum design process To evaluate the pilots through workshops with all stakeholders and outline positive aspects

and areas that might need reviewing To examine any feedback from the new periodic review process that might impact on the

curriculum design process and share any data that may be collected related to the actual approval process with the Academic Development Unit

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

By August 2011 To modify the curriculum design process as needed and re-pilot with programmes and

Schools who have not yet been involved with the revised curriculum design process To develop case studies from the stakeholder experiences sharing good practice from the

curriculum design process and review the map of engagement to see if this needs updating To develop principles and tools such as templates to aid staff involved in curriculum design To review the evaluation and disseminate data of the curriculum design and change process

across the University

By August 2012 To review the stakeholder map to ensure appropriate engagement has been achieved in all

areas and develop a plan to manage any gaps that have been identified To evaluate the project and the outcomes of this with employer and graduate feedback as

well as all other stakeholders and use this to compliment the continuous evaluation that has been ongoing

To disseminate any further evaluation data and curriculum design activities

3. Overall ApproachThe project has four main activities:

1. Discovery and planning which will consist of a review of the current curriculum design process, analysis of the data collected from the undergraduate review and others sources of information such as the module and programme specifications and, an evaluation of the current technology to support both curriculum design and learning and teaching activities. In addition data will also be available to this project from the e-portfolio and PDP projects and the evaluation and review of the Virtual learning environment. All this data will be used to develop the plan for project and an outline of the curriculum design process that might be used initially. Further data will be collected from stakeholders who are involved in the curriculum design process as pilots as well as from the evaluation of the current curriculum design processes used both within other institutions but also those available through published materials.

2. Process of engaging discussions with curriculum teams to continue to collect data as the curriculum design process is used and stakeholders share their experiences. In addition the revised periodic review process will have been implemented and further data related to curriculum design may be collected from this. This will enable the curriculum design process to be revised as its use becomes more widespread. This will also enable the scope of change to be mapped and any possible risk that has not been identified to be defined.



3. Evaluation and revision which will consist of using the ongoing evaluating data from the curriculum design process and the process of change to refine and further develop the process. This activity and that of the process of emergent design interactions by their nature overlap. An essential principle of this process is that of developing case studies and sharing good practice and lessons learnt not just within the institution but with the wider community. It is envisaged that all Schools will have programmes that need some curriculum design activity due to the undergraduate review recommendations, by the end of August 2011.

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

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

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

4. Project OutputsThe project outputs will include:

Six monthly progress reports on the project and the final report Evaluation reports produced six monthly An analysis and evaluation of the curriculum design process and identification of principles

and values that underpin the process Case studies related to stakeholder engagement and communication Case studies from the pilots of the process will be developed from each of the Schools

involved. Three case studies will be aimed for in the first year of the pilots with a further four to follow so all Schools are represented. These will use combination of written studies, audio and video and should encompass views from those who design and teach the programmes, and where appropriate employers and professional body stakeholder views.

Tips and guidance for curriculum design Workshops on curriculum design, the technology to support this and to develop learning and

teaching materials as part of the process A range of conference presentations and publications about the project and outcomes Guidance will be developed for practitioners and staff involved in programme design in terms

of engaging in the process in a developmental manner and for stakeholders such as employers and professional bodies on their role in the curriculum design process

5. Project OutcomesThe PREDICT project will lead to an enhanced curriculum design process supported by technology for all programmes with a focus on educational development and the learning experience. In addition those wishing to develop interdisciplinary programmes will have practical guidance which will impact upon learning and teaching and the student experience by facilitating work on collaborative programmes that are at present often disjointed. This should enable more collaboration and provide increased opportunities to evaluate and research learning and teaching of this nature. The technology being integral to the process should also facilitate lecturers who are developing programmes to spend more time on the actual programme development and reduce the process time which will promote and support innovation. Technological support for the process will enable a more flexible, innovative and responsive approach.



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

The institution has a key objective to reassess all undergraduate programmes and implement recommendations to enhance these. This project will support this implementation whilst also developing a curriculum design process that focuses on educational development, enhancing the learning experience, supporting interdisciplinary programmes and enabling a more responsive approach to programme design. The new design process will be incorporated into the usual University processes once the evaluation data has been collected and analysed. The project will enable both case studies and guidance materials to be developed which can be used by others within the JISC community and beyond. Through the dissemination of stages of this project at conferences and through publications in journals others within the JISC community and beyond will be able to gain information about lessons learnt and good practice.

6. Stakeholder AnalysisStakeholder Interest / stake ImportanceStudents current and alumni

Students will be involved in the new design process which will lead to improved learning opportunities, information about programmes and ensure we are better able to prepare students for employment in a range of settings.

Students will be involved in range of ways but these will be discussed with Schools so that they are appropriate to current student engagement approaches.

Both alumni and current student views will be sort in terms of their involvement in programme design and the information they have access to prior to their commencement on the programmes and during their programme

HIGH

University staff, both academic and support

We need to work with staff to identify what their views of curriculum design are and to gain information about if they think improvements to the processes could be made. We need to find out how they believe they should be involved in the design process and what support they would need. There are a range of approaches that could be used to gain this information:

There is a module for staff within the MA Academic Practice Programme that focuses on curriculum development and evaluation. As part of the module staff could work on exploring the current design process and examining other approaches that could be used. They could cascade information about the JISC project to their colleagues and on completion of the module they could be asked to be an “expert reference group” who could provide feedback on plans and changes as the project progresses. This module runs annually and so at least three groups will be developed during the project.

We will ask staff their views on the process and their role when they have been involved in curriculum design through both a focus group approach and a questionnaire.

We also hold an annual learning and teaching conference which will be used as an opportunity to share the project with staff and collect their views on the curriculum design process

HIGH

Stakeholder Interest / stake ImportancePage 6 of 35Document title: JISC Project PlanLast updated: April 2007


Senior managers

This project relates to some of the strategic imperatives of the University which include facilitating an educational development approach to designing programmes, enhanced opportunity for interdisciplinary programmes, reviewing the process to be more responsive and a clearer focus on the learning experience.

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

Senior management will be key advocates for the work of the project as well as ensuring that the project delivers. The project team will report to internal senior management events to ensure dissemination across the University and to ensure the project maintains a high profile across the University.

HIGH

Project Managers

There are other reviews being undertaken across the University which overlap with some aspects of the project and so in order to ensure that no repetition occurs and that information is shared other project managers will be provided with regular updates on this project.

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

HIGH

Project Board Members

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

All members of the project board will met with individually to discuss the project, their vision of the project and outcomes and their role in enabling the project to be successful.

In addition all minutes from the project board will be a record of the development of the project

HIGH

Employers and Professional Bodies

It is important to involve employers and professional bodies in the project to ask them what knowledge and skills they would like the graduates to have on completion of their programme but also how they would like to be involved in the process of curriculum design and approval.

This will be achieved through using a Delphi study technique to those who have links with the University programmes. In addition those involved in the approval process throughout this project will be asked about their experiences and positive aspects as well as those that could be reviewed through a questionnaire.

HIGH

Teaching Union Reps

Representatives from the union will be asked to provide view of the curriculum design and how they would like to be involved in the project.

The representatives will be able to provide a view of concerns that staff may have raised with them about curriculum design as well as having some suggestions about changes through discussion with staff at the University as well as their contact with those in other HE institutions.

This will be achieved through regular meetings with them at key stages of the project such as when plans for the new design process are drafted to collect baseline data on the current process and proposed changes and then six monthly to provide an update on the project and gain feedback from them

MEDIUM



Stakeholder Interest / stake ImportanceHigher Educational Institutions

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

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

MEDIUM

HEA Academy and associated Subject Centres

Staff from the Academy and members of subject centres will be interested in the key findings of the project, any models developed and case studies focused on specific programmes. This will provide additional opportunities for dissemination as well as sharing practice across the sector.

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

MEDIUM

JISC Project management Team

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

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

HIGH

JISC Project community

Other JISC project teams will be kept informed of progress but also any information that is relevant to the community as lessons learnt and models that may have been developed as well as any innovative approaches to involving stakeholders.

MEDIUM

7. Risk AnalysisThe risks in this plan will be reviewed every six months when the interim reports are being prepared and any changes will be highlighted with appropriate amendments to this plan.

Risk Probability(1-5)

Severity(1-5)

Score(P x S)

Action to Prevent/Manage Risk

Key staff involved in the project leaving

1 2 2 Any key individual would be replaced with a similarly skilled and experienced person and where possible this will be planned ahead

Staff adapt the processes of curriculum design and the policies or use processes outside of those specified

2 2 4 Ensure as many staff as possible have a voice in the project and are able to provide information about their needs

Staff being sceptical about the technology to support curriculum design given existing experiences

3 2 5 Ensure staff are able to discuss their requirements for technology support. Pilot technology at early stages and publish successes and lessons learnt openly

OrganisationalChanges in School commitment

1 2 2 Whilst School priorities might change this initiative is central to future activities and so ensuring School staff are engaged with the project should prevent this



Risk Probability(1-5)

Severity(1-5)

Score(P x S)

Action to Prevent/Manage Risk

TechnicalCurrent technologies cannot support the process

2 3 6 Additional technologies will be purchased to support the project

There is a change either in a key member of the senior management of the university or in the strategic direction of the University

1 3 4 At present most of the key senior management staff have been appointed within the last two years and so the University strategy has been revised to look to the next five years and is not due for a major strategic review. The Project team however has a key member of the senior management as its executive and will maintain a clear vision of the University strategy.

However if there are indications that a key senior member of staff is leaving, a change of policy or strategy is likely to be introduced the risk to the project would be assessed and consideration given to how the change may lead to amended plans for the project or the change may in fact enhance the success and benefit of the project.

Wider Community of HEI’s not sharing their experience in this area

2 2 4 Information from our project will be shared within the community and we will seek information in a collaborative manner

Employers and professional bodies not engaging with the project

2 2 4 Provide information about how this will impact on the graduates they employ

Students not engaging with the project

2 3 6 Provide information about how this might enhance their experience and that of other students

Other reviews of the undergraduate curriculum not linking to this project

1 2 2 Ensure that the project board has members from any other review taking place

Other review deadlines change and cause a delay in the plans

3 2 5 Other review deadlines are monitored and as soon as there is an indication of a delay this will be discussed the PREDICT plan reviewed and JISC informed of any changes

Scope and scale of the project larger than first estimated

2 2 4 Monitor all stages of the project and restructure plans in consultation with JISC



8. Standards

Name of standard or specification

Version Notes

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

BPEL 2.0 Business Process Execution Language - used to make busness processes runnable. See http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpel

9. Technical DevelopmentCity University has adopted IBM’s WebSphere family of products as its strategic solution for SOA. The core components of this stack includes: -

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

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

create a run time version of the process.c. Rational Application Developer which is used to develop core services.d. WebSphere Process Server which is the run-time engine.e. WebSphere Advanced ESB which provides integration capability with our core enter-

prise systemsf. WebSphere SAP Adaptor which provides integration from our Advanced ESB to SAPg. Business Monitor

i. Allows us to view status business processesii. Allows us to feed metrics back to Modeleriii. Dashboard and reporting capabilityiv. Push to Blackberryv. Can integrate with corporate monitoring toolsvi. User alerts based on KPI thresholds

h. WebSphere Portal which manages the user experiencei. Microsoft Active Directory which provides user authentication.

b) City University Core Enterprise Systems which include: -a. Student Records System which is the SITS product from Tribal. This product runs on

an Oracle 10g database. Integration with this product is achieved via our middleware using the new Stu-Talk product.

b. CitySpace which is our core Virtual Learning Environment and is based on the WebCT product. Integration is via their published API which is based on IMS.

c. SAP which is our core finance system. Integration is via the WebSphere SAP ad-aptor.

d. PRISM which currently manages our programme and module specifications. It is a custom built web application developed in Java and deployed to WebSphere Applica-tion Server.

e. Millennium which manages our student library.

After an extensive review of the VLE market, City has decided to port their current CitySpace environment to the open source Moodle product which will happen over the lifetime of the PREDICT project. The open nature of Moodle allows us to investigate further the integration of the VLE and this may open challenges in area of Curriculum design particularly in the area of Assessments.


http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpel

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsbpel


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

All the project deliverables, reports and other relevant outputs will be published via the project website and made freely available to the academic community. Where appropriate, materials will be offered to relevant repositories (including JORUM and CloudWorks) to support wider dissemination and sustainable access.

Project Resources

11. Project PartnersThere are no project partners involved in PREDICT.

12. Project ManagementCity University London follows the PRINCE2 project management methodology. Therefore, the constitution of the project board and team has been articulated in relation to PRINCE2 roles.

Name Role Allocation of Time

Contact Details

Professor David Bolton, Deputy Vice Chancellor Education.

Project Executive Two days per month

[email protected] 7040 8443

Dr Pam Parker,Associate Director, Learning Development Centre

Project Manager 0.4 FTE [email protected] 7040 3047

Dr Susannah Quinsee, Director of Learning Development

Project Director 0.2 FTE [email protected] 7040 0215

Susannah Marsden, Head of the Academic Development Unit

Senior Supplier 0.3 FTE [email protected] 7040 8015

Megan Palmer Senior Supplier [email protected]








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


Deputy Head of the Academic Development Unit

020 7040 8323



Name Role Allocation of Time

Contact Details

Helen Emerson, Academic and Professional Process and Support Director,.

Senior Supplier 0.4 FTE [email protected] 7040 8323

This role is waiting for new appointment following a member of staff leaving

Project Assurance Two days per month


John Gallagher,Information Architect

Application Architect

Two days per month

[email protected] 069882

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

Senior User Two days per month


Additional School members to be determined once pilots identified

Senior User

Sally BradleySenior Lecturer in Curriculum and Professional Development Learning and Teaching Institute Sheffield Hallam University

External Member [email protected]

The project board Terms of Reference are:

The Project Board is responsible for the overall direction and management of the project and has responsibility and authority for the project.

1 Approve the project plan and any changes that may be required to this during the life of the project.

2 Agree the role and responsibilities of members of the project team3 Approve any project reports and budget updates4 Approve identification of any risks and actions outlined to reduce / remove risks5 Ensure that any resources required for the project are available6 Provide overall guidance and direction to the project, ensuring it remains within any spe-

cified constraints7 Approve any outputs of the project including lessons learnt, recommendations and plans

for closure of the project8 Responsibility for the evaluation activities of the project, monitoring these and receiving

reports on progress to date and approving further action where required

The project is to meet the minimum of once per term with additional meetings as required to ensure critical deadlines for actions and submission of reports are met.

13. Programme SupportThere are dates provided by JISC for workshops on methodology and evaluation and it is felt at present that this will provide sufficient support. However if any additional needs are identified they will be discussed with the JISC team.

14. BudgetPage 13 of 35Document title: JISC Project PlanLast updated: April 2007








This budget reflects the revised one sent to JISC following confirmation of Bid being granted. See appendix A.

Detailed Project Planning

15. WorkpackagesSee Appendix B



16. Evaluation PlanTiming Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be ResponsibleThis section of the plan relates to the Discovery and planning phase and the learning objectives to be completed for August 2009April 2009

The appropriateness of project plan

Will the plan enable the approaches for the project to achieve the aim?

Review by project board and programme manager

The plan will encompass all areas required for the project

Project manager and director and the project management team

April 2009

Technological support available for programme design at present

What aspects of the programme design process are currently supported by technology?

Analysis of the process and how data is collected and maintained.Analysis of aspects of the process that are supported by technology

There is an outline of how technology currently supports the design process

Project manager and application architect

June 2009

The current programme design process is outlined and analysed and any benefits or issues that might impact on a responsive process or an interdisciplinary programme are identified

Has the baseline data captured the detail of the current programme design process as outlined in the policy?Are there any benefits or issues with the current process particularly in terms of being responsive and in supporting interdisciplinary programmes?

Analysis of the process and discussion with staff across the University

The baseline data has captured correctly all aspects of the current programme design process from the policy and a list of any benefits and issues

Staff across the University and Project manager

June 2009

A comprehensive list of key employers and professional bodies involved in programme design is complete

Is the list of employers and professional bodies involved in programme design complete?

Analysis of the list and consultation with the staff from across the University

The list of employers and professional bodies involved in the design process is complete

Staff across the University and Project manager



Timing Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be ResponsibleAugust 2009

All key stakeholders have been identified

Have all stakeholders been identified?Are there any groups missing?

Documentary analysis of School Curriculum design meetings, Interviews, Questionnaires

All stakeholders are involved and believe they can contribute to the design process

Project Manager, Project Director, Senior User Schools

August 2009

Current module and programme specifications demonstrate good practice in terms of the information provided

Do the module and programme specifications provide clear and accurate detail about programmes?

Documentary analysis of module and programme specifications

Module and programme specifications have been analysed and good practice and areas to identify have been outlined

Project Manager

August 2009

Data collected for the Undergraduate review is shared with the project manager for this project

What data has been collected?What relevant information has been gained?What gaps in the data exist?

Documentary analysis of the data and checking the project plan for areas not covered

The data collected can be used for the baseline report and areas missing can be identified

Project Manager and Senior Supplier Academic Development Unit

August 2009

All current reviews across the University that have links with this project have shared information

How are all the other reviews progressing?Has data from the reviews been shared?Are there lessons that can be shared and successes?Is there any overlap of effort?

Discussion with key staff from other reviews

There is no overlap of work across the reviews and information is shared enabling the reviews to compliment and support each other

Lead from other reviews and Project executive and director and Senior supplier Academic Development Unit



Timing Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be ResponsibleAugust 2009

The short and long term recommendations for the undergraduate review are published

Which are the short term recommendations for implementation by September 2010?Which are longer term recommendations?

Review the Undergraduate review report and list of recommendations

The recommendations needing action within the next academic year (September 2010 – August 2011) can be identified and those which will be implemented after this

Project Manager and Senior Supplier Academic Development Unit

August 2009

There is a clear process for managing a change in the curriculum design process

Is there a process for managing change across the institution?Are all schools included in the plans for rolling out the curriculum design process?

Discussion with peers in schools, liaison with senior management staff, discussion with union representatives and the drafting of a plan

The rollout of the Curriculum design across the University is planned and all are aware of this and support it

Project executive and director

August 2009

Additional technology required for the design process is acquired

Has the additional technology that was required been acquired?

Review of existing technology and a list of additional technology that is required is developed

Additional technology has been acquired

Project manager and application architect

August 2009

The plan for the project is revised to take account of changes within the institution and through the various reviews

What issues need to be considered when revising the plan?What needs to be changed in the plan to ensure this can now be taken forward?

Discussions with Project Board members and peers within the institution and those from other projects

The revised plan meets the needs of the project and expectations of the board members

Project board members



Timing Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be ResponsibleThis section of the plan relates to the Process of Engaging Discussions with Curriculum Teams and the learning objectives to be completed for August 2010September 2009

Outline the Project Board members expectations of the project and the activities the project is to achieve

What do the Project Board members want the project to achieve?What specific activities do the board members expect the project to achieve?

Discussion with the board members and examination of the minutes from the meetings

The project meets the board members expectations and activities that were expected from the project have been undertaken

Project Executive, Director and Manager

October 2009

There are programmes/modules identified in all schools to undertake the pilots

Which programmes will be used for the pilots?Do the programmes for the Pilot come from across a range of schools?

Examination of the undergraduate review implementation plan, the Moodle implementation plan, the programmes within the Senior User Schools area and from the award scheme

There are programmes/modules identified for the Pilot ranging from all Schools

Project Executive and Senior Supplier Academic Development Unit, Project Director, Senior User Schools and Project Manager

October 2009

Stakeholder map of engagement and communication

Are all the stakeholders included in the map?What levels of engagement do the stakeholders have with the project?What communication approaches are needed?

Check the list of identified stakeholders, Consider their role in curriculum design and their likely engagement and how would be the most appropriate method to communicate. Check this map with some stakeholders for current accuracy

Stakeholders are appropriately engaged in the project and communication with them is effective

Project Manager and Director and Senior User Schools



Timing Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be ResponsibleNovember 2009

Programme and module specifications format and guidance for content are outlined

What information needs to be included in the specification for students, staff and employers/professional bodies?How does the information need to be provided in terms of language?

Discussion with key staff such as marketing, student union and workshops

The programme and module specifications provide information stakeholders require in an appropriate language

Senior Suppliers Academic Development Unit

Dec 2009

Principles and Values for the curriculum design are outlined

What are the principles and values stakeholders have about curriculum design?

Workshops and discussions

Principles and Values for the curriculum design are outlined

Students, staff across the University, project executive, project director, project manager

Dec 2009

Stakeholders views of curriculum design as a process are documented

What are the stakeholders’ views of curriculum design?Do the stakeholders make adaptations to aspects of the process and why?What concerns and successes do the stakeholders identify about the process?

Questionnaire, Delphi study, discussions and focus groups

There is a detailed account of the process of curriculum design from the stakeholders perspective which includes any deviations they make, any concerns they have and any successes they outline

Students, Staff, professional bodies and employers and the Project manager

Dec 2009

Definitions of key terms are developed

What do stakeholders mean when they discuss curriculum design, responsive and agile and principles and values?

Questionnaire, Delphi study, focus groups and documentary analysis

Definitions are developed for all key terms

Students, Staff, professional bodies and employers and the Project manager, Senior supplier Academic Development Unit



Timing Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be ResponsibleDec 2009

Other models of curriculum development are available for the project team to consider when redesigning the curriculum process

What models of curriculum development are used across the sector?Do other models and processes promote interdisciplinary programmes more effectively than ours?How long do other processes take?

Examining websites, Discussion with peers, sharing data from across the design projects

Data is available related to other models and processes that might meet our needs

Project manager

Jan 2010

A range of curriculum design processes have been used within the pilots based upon programme and School need and they have been evaluated

What processes were used?Did they work?How many programmes were used in the pilot?

Review which programmes were in the pilot and examine the process they used through documentary analysis and discussion with the stakeholders

A range of processes were piloted and aspects of good practice and areas for development are identified

Project manager, director, senior user process and support and application architect Senior User Schools and staff

July 2010

The links between the curriculum design process and the approval process has been identified

What information from the curriculum design is needed for approval? How do these two activities compliment each other?

Sharing data between two activities, workshops and discussions

There is a clear outline of what information is needed for both processes and how these compliment each other

Project manager and Senior Suppliers Academic Development Unit

July 2010

Data, plans and activities from the Undergraduate review implementation have been shared with this project to provide further evaluation data

What activities from the undergraduate review have related to curriculum design?Has this enabled the recommendations of the undergraduate review to be implemented?

Sharing data and workshops

There is a clear link between the implementation of the undergraduate review recommendations and the curriculum design process and project

Project manager, Senior Suppliers Academic Development Unit and senior User Schools



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

Data from pilots is disseminated

Did the process work?What lessons were learnt?What changes are needed prior to using this with another group of programmes?

Conference presentations, journal articles, case studies of the pilots, discussion with peers, project website

The data from the pilots is disseminated and any change to the design process are made

Staff and students from Schools who undertook the pilot and Project manager and director and senior user from the schools and application architect

August 2011

Design process is ready to be used across other schools

Have the suggested changes been made?Are all Schools now able to use the process?

Analysis of programme design documentation, focus groups and questionnaire with stakeholders from across schools

The design process has been used all schools

Project executive, director and manager and Senior User from the Schools

August 2011

Review the revised periodic programme review to explore if there are issues related to curriculum design as part of the process

Have the periodic reviews undertaken to date promoted curriculum design as part of this process?

Analysis of periodic programme review reports and documentation, and discussions with staff involved in these processes

The curriculum design is supported by the revised periodic programme review process

Students, staff from schools, senior user schools, project manager and senior supplier academic development unit

August 2011

Principles and values underpinning the curriculum design process represent stakeholder views

Do all stakeholders identify with the principles and values?Do all stakeholders know about the principles and values?

Focus group discussions with Stakeholders and analysis of documentation used throughout the curriculum design process

All stakeholders can outline the principles and values underpinning curriculum design and display ownership of these

Project Manager, Senior User Schools

August 2011

Dissemination and integration of any data from the use of the process across all schools

Have findings been taken into account with each use of the process?Have lessons been learnt been shared internally and across the wider sector?

Data analysis, focus groups, questionnaire, discussion with peers, conference presentations, journal articles, project website

The process is disseminated

Staff and students from Schools, employers and professional bodies, Senior Management Project manager and director and Senior User Schools



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

The new process is successful

Did all stakeholders feel the process met their needs?Was the change successfully introduced across all schools?

Questionnaire, focus groups, documentary analysis, discussion with peers

All stakeholders think the new process is successful

Staff and students from Schools, employers and professional bodies, Senior Management Project manager and director and Senior User Schools

August 2012

There is dissemination of the project outcomes

Have the outcomes from the project been shared across the sector?

Case studies, guidance materials, conference presentations, articles

Project outcomes have been disseminated

Staff, Senior Managers, Senior User Schools Project manager/Director



17. Quality Plan

OutputTiming Quality

criteriaQA method(s) Evidence of

complianceQuality

responsibilitiesQuality tools

(if applicable)

Ongoing Extent of stakeholder engagement and input

Review of activities and documentation

All stakeholders are included in activities and provide information

Project Board N/A

Ongoing Good practice and lessons learnt are shared

Internal newsletters and seminars, external use of case studies, conference presentations and articles

Good practice and lessons learnt from PREDICT are shared within the institution and the wider community

Project Board N/A

June 2009

There is an outline of the future needs for curriculum design

Review the information collected and ensure all needs are met

The outline for the future is clearly articulated and all agree it is fit for purpose

Project Board N/A

January 2010

Principles, Values and process used in curriculum design by stakeholders are outlined from pilots

Review data from pilots to ensure all these are included

The principles, values and process is fit for purpose across a range of Schools

Project Board N/A

May 2010 The evaluation of the pilots refines the principles, values and process further

Review the evaluation data and consult the stakeholders

Stakeholders state the principles, values and process represent their views

Project Board N/A

July 2010 Programme and module specifications contain information in a stakeholder preferred format

Review evaluation data from stakeholders and from discussion with stakeholders

Stakeholders state the programme and module specifications contain the information they require

Project Board N/A



OutputTiming Quality

criteriaQA method(s) Evidence of

complianceQuality

responsibilitiesQuality tools

(if applicable)

August 2011

There is a plan for this to become everyday business

Develop procedures

The new procedure is known to all and is part of the normal business

Project Board N/A

June 2012

The project was effective in achieving the aim

Review all interim reports and the final draft report

The interim reports and final draft report identifies the overall aim has been achieved

Project Board N/A

18. Dissemination Plan

Timing Dissemination Activity

Audience Purpose Key Message

Ongoing Institution website and tools for communication

All stakeholders To provide updates on the project and enable stakeholders to ask questions and share information

Ensuring stakeholder engagement

Ongoing Use of staff as an expert group from the Curriculum development and evaluation module

Peers within schools and the project team

To share information with peers and to provide information to the project team and develop stakeholder ownership

Sharing of information within the institution and developing ownership

Ongoing Circle website Other project teams, JISC and the wider community

To share information and provide updates on the project

Sharing good practice

Ongoing JISC Learning and teaching expert group

JISC community To share good practice and information about the projects

Sharing good practice

Ongoing Workshops and meetings with JISC

Other JISC projects

To share projects and lessons learnt

Sharing of good practice

Once a Term Printed newsletter All stakeholders To provide update on project and summary of progress

Ensuring stakeholder engagement and maximise dissemination



Timing Dissemination Activity

Audience Purpose Key Message

Annually Workshops All stakeholders and wider HEI staff and stakeholders

To ensure engagement by stakeholders and to share good practice but also for stakeholders to develop some ownership through regular contact and input

Ensuring stakeholder engagement and ownership and maximise dissemination

Annually Developing Case Studies

Wider HEI staff and stakeholders

To share good practice and lessons learnt from the stakeholders perspective as well as the project team

Promoting stakeholder engagement and ownership and Sharing good practice

Annually Conference papers and posters for HEA, Technology organisations and Learning and Teaching groups




Annually Journal articles via curriculum development and learning and teaching journals




Six Monthly Reports Project Board, Stakeholders and JISC

To review the project’s progress

The project’s review of keeping to the plan and achieving the aim



19. Exit and Sustainability Plans

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

website and JISCTo evaluate the project and process and inform future such projects

Case Studies To share lessons on the project and how the process was used both internally and within the wider community

To share the outcomes of the project so others might explore how these may be applied in their area

Curriculum development and approval process

To become part of the University procedures by pilot studies, evaluation, integration of evaluation outcomes and redesign

To embed the project outcomes and the new approval process

Research and Scholarly outputs

To disseminate the project activities and methods

To inform future projects of this nature both internal and external and disseminate the project outcomes

Project Outputs Why Sustainable Scenarios for Taking Forward

Issues to Address

Final Evaluation following first cohort into employment

Vital evaluation data of effectiveness of programmes

Review evaluation data for any further changes that might be needed

Feedback to all stakeholders

Research and Scholarly activity

To include final evaluation data

Produce articles and conference papers and posters

To share final evaluation data

Appendices

Appendix A. Project Budget

Appendix B. Workpackages



Appendix B

JISC WORK PACKAGE

WORKPACKAGES Month

1S08

2O 08

3N08

4D 08

5Ja 09

6F 09

7M 09

8Ap 09

9My09

10Ju09

11Jy09

12Au09

13S09

14O09

15N09

16D09

17Ja10

18F10

19M10

20Ap10

21My 10

22Ju10

23Jy10

24Au10

1: 1 & 11

2 &3

12 4, 6,7&8

9 5&10

2: 1314151624

18 17 24 1920 212223

WORKPACKAGES Month

25S10

26O10

27N10

28D10

29Ja11

30F11

31M11

32Ap11

33My11

34Ju11

35Jy11

36Au11

37S 11

38O11

39N11

40D11

41Ja12

42F12

43M12

44Ap 12

45My 12

46Ju12

47Jy12

48Au12

3: 27 29 28 25 29 264: 32 31

3230 32

Project start date: 01/09/08

Project completion date: 31/07/12



Duration: 48 months

Work Package and Activities Earliest start date

Latest completion date

Output (deliverables and reports in bold)

Milestone

Responsibility

YEAR 1

WORKPACKAGE 1: Objective: The objective for work package 1 is to undertake a review of and, discover and plan for curriculum design and identify aspects of good practice

01/09/08 31/08/09

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

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

Ongoing Pam Parker

2. Collect data on all stakeholders involved in curriculum development and approval across the institution and create a list

01/12/08 31/01/09 A List of all stakeholders involved in curriculum development and approval Completed

Pam Parker

3. Outline current processes of curriculum development and approval

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

Susannah Marsden

4. Outline different modes for involving stakeholders in the project

01/02/09 30/06/09 Different modes of involving stakeholders identified Completed

Pam Parker

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

01/01/09 Links are established with key staff in other reviews to ensure findings and activities are shared and compliment each other

Ongoing David Bolton & Susannah Quinsee

6. Develop baseline data report on a range of areas

01/04/09 31/07/09 Baseline data report is produced and is an ongoing record of activity Completed

Pam Parker

7. Outline current technology support for curriculum development and identify any

01/12/08 30/04/09 Outline of current technology support ability and any gaps

John Gallagher



gaps Completed






Milestone

Responsibility

8. Analyse the current programme and module specifications to identify the information they provide and good practice

01/01/09 30/04/09 Programme and module specifications are analysed for details of the information they contain and areas of good practice Completed

Pam Parker

9. Examine the data collected from the undergraduate review for the baseline data report and to avoid duplication of data collection during the project

01/05/09 31/07/09 The data collected has been analysed and added to the baseline data report where appropriate and a note of gaps in the data has been made for further data collection Completed

Pam Parker/Susannah Marsden

10. Review the undergraduate reviews recommendations for short and long term actions and those that will that can be focused upon for the curriculum design pilots

31/07/09 31/08/09 A summary of all recommendations has been examined and those that can be focused upon for the pilots have been identified Completed

Pam Parker

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

Pam Parker

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

YEAR 1/2

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

01/09/08 31/08/10

13. To identify Project members expectations of the project and activities

01/09/09 30/10/09 Expectations of the Project Board members in terms of the project and

Pam Parker



activities are outlined14. Develop a stakeholder map outlining the

range, their level of engagement and appropriate modes of communications about the project

01/09/09 30/10/09 A comprehensive Stakeholder map is developed which can used for evaluation of their engagement

Pam Parker






Milestone

Responsibility

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

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

Pam Parker/ Susannah Quinsee

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

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

David Bolton, Susannah Marsden, Susannah Quinsee, Pam Parker and Roberta Williams

17. Through discussion with the stakeholders involved in the curriculum design pilots identify their vision of the curriculum design process, their principles and values

01/11/09 31/01/10 A document detailing visions for the curriculum design process with principles and values developed form the stakeholders is developed

Pam Parker

18. Undertake research into approaches to curriculum design including for interdisciplinary programmes with other institutions and through the literature

01/09/09 31/12/09 Document outlining approaches to Curriculum design and an article/conference presentation with case studies

Pam Parker

19. Review the current approval process for links to the curriculum design process and information required by both to articulate this clearly and identify changes to the approval process

1/11/09 31/08/10 There is a clear statement about the information needed for both activities and following the review of the approval process there will be a new process outlined

Susannah Marsden

20. Programme and module specification format will be reviewed to meet stakeholder needs and through consultation with them the content provided will be in a more appropriate language

1/11/09 31/08/10 Programme and module specifications will be produced as report that meet the needs of stakeholders and in an appropriate language

Susannah Marsden






Milestone

Responsibility

21. The management and implementation of the undergraduate review recommendations enables data to be shared with this project and programme teams take part in this curriculum design project as they action the plans

1/11/09 31/08/10 Programmes implementing the undergraduate review recommendations contribute to the curriculum design project as additional pilot studies

Susannah Marsden

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

01/05/10 31/08/10 Evaluation report of the pilot studies and article, conference presentation, case studies

Pam Parker and Roberta Williams

23. Review the evaluation of the periodic review process to identify if there are any implications for the curriculum design process

01/07/10 31/08/10 An evaluation report of any implications for the curriculum design process is developed

Megan Palmer and Pam Parker

24. Provide interim reports on the project with any relate evaluation data included

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

YEAR 3

WORKPACKAGE 3: Objective: The objective of work package 3 is to evaluate and build on the curriculum design process using the evaluation data

01/09/10 31/08/11

25 Develop lessons learnt and successes of the pilot design process with stakeholder feedback on their experiences and develop some case studies

01/11/10 28/02/11 Lessons learnt guide, Good Practice Guide and Case Studies developed with stakeholders

Pam Parker and Roberta Williamsr

26 Modify the curriculum design process drawing upon the experiences of the

01/11/10 30/06/11 Revised curriculum design process is developed drawing upon the

Pam Parker, John



stakeholders and the findings from activity 23 stakeholder experiences Gallagher & Helen Emerson






Milestone

Responsibility

27 Roll out the curriculum design process across all schools

01/09/10 Remaining Schools use curriculum design process

Ongoing Pam Parker

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

01/10/10 31/12/10 An evaluation of the stakeholder map and principles and values used for curriculum design to ensure these are still appropriate

Pam Parker & Susannah Quinsee & Roberta Williams

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

YEAR 4

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

01/09/11 31/08/12

30 Undertake a full analysis of the project taking account of areas that may need to be completed after the project life ie stakeholders employing graduates and graduates

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

Pam Parker & Susannah Quinsee

31 Undertake an evaluation of the change process used across the institution and lessons learnt as well as good practice

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

Pam Parker & Susannah Quinsee

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

31/10/11 & 30/04/12

31/07/12 Final Interim Report, Draft Final report and Final Report

Pam Parker


Documents

JISC Project Plan Template - Welcome to City · Web viewJISC Project Plan Version 4 URL if document is posted on project web site ... BPMN 1.1 Business Process Modeling Notation