Underpinning Educational Philosophy and Goals

Principles related to the Underpinning Educational Philosophy and Goals of Programmes

1. Programmes should be underpinned by a programme strategy, pedagogic approach and clear principles which are informed by educational theory and practice and which are understood by the programme team and are communicated to and clarified with students.
2. Programmes should comprise a coherent set of modules, each of which has a designated credit value and FHEQ level, arranged over the duration of the programme to appropriately scaffold students’ learning (including independent learning).
3. Programmes should identify their modules as either core, compulsory or option and make any dependencies to other modules clear by identifying where modules are pre-requisite and/or co-requisite to other modules.
4. All undergraduate and integrated Masters’ programmes should have the potential to lead to honours. Intermediate exit awards are to be available as appropriate.
5. Programmes should be designed based on the minimum number of credits for an award unless in exceptional circumstances and approved by AQSC, and only if the required programme outcomes cannot be accommodated within the minimum.
6. The assessment requirements of a module should be proportionate to its credit value and level.
7. Teaching staff should be appropriately qualified and/or be of an appropriate professional standing

Undergraduate Programmes

• Programme designers should ensure that there is an opportunity for and assessment of independent learning and competencies appropriate to the discipline and/or professional requirements. This should typically be constituted as a coherent body of work with a credit weighting of 15 ECTS credits, though School Programmes Committees may use their discretion and agree to validate other formats and credit weightings where a sound academic argument is put forward by the discipline and supported by the External Advisor.  There is no expectation that such a body of work will necessarily take the form of a traditional, empirical, research dissertation.

Postgraduate Programme

• Programme designers should ensure that there is an opportunity for and assessment of independent learning and competencies appropriate to the discipline and/or professional requirements. This should typically be constituted as a coherent body of work with a credit weighting of 30 ECTS credits, though School Programmes Committees may use their discretion and agree to validate other formats and credit weightings where a sound academic argument is put forward by the discipline and supported by the External Advisor.  There is no expectation that such a body of work will necessarily take the form of a traditional, empirical, research dissertation.

Articulation and Guidance

When programmes are being designed, programme leaders and their teams should start by considering the key purposes of the programme and associated modules, and specifically, the learning outcomes that they want students to be able to demonstrate and why.  It is important to look at the programme holistically and decide on programme level strategies and principles which are important for the programme and will, therefore, need to permeate the programme and its delivery. This should include consideration of programme level learning, teaching and assessment strategies and approaches. Any strategies, principles and guidelines at University, Faculty and School level will need to be factored in when discussing those aspects considered most important for the programme.

Consideration of the exit point and required journey to get students successfully to the point of award should help programme teams to develop a curriculum which ensures the development of required and desired knowledge, understanding, skills and competencies through core and compulsory modules with optional choices complementing these.

Modules are the building blocks of the programme, and should be created to ensure that the programme learning outcomes are appropriately taught and assessed.

According to Thomas et al (2015) there is a “wide range of interpretations of Directed Independent Learning, however, in common with the literature, the approaches are all student-centred, and include differing degrees of direction – it is not simply something that happens when students go off to study on their own, but something related to their essential nature as enquirers, or to their needs as learners within their academic programme of study”.  As part of the programme approval or review process, programme teams should discuss what independent learning means for their discipline and the programme under design and they should articulate this throughout their documentation.  Independent learning and the nature of its assessment will be discussed as part of programme approval or review.

In principle, an inclusive approach to programme design should lessen the need for making adjustments for individual students, including disabled students although this does not preclude or replace the requirement for making reasonable adjustments.

Checklist and Questions

• Are the modules on the programme taught at an appropriate level that draw together learning that develops over the programme?
• How effective is the pattern of assessment within and across modules (timing; variety; fitness for purpose; organisation of formative and summative)? Who is overseeing this?
• How are students feeding into the development of modules/programmes to support their understanding of how elements of assessment fit together?
• Do all named awards (at PGT level) have clear learning outcomes attached to them?
• If the programme requires more than the maximum number of credits, has approval been received from AQSC, and is the academic case a strong one?
• Is there clear development of independent learning that progresses throughout the programme and reflects the aspirations of a Russell Group University, the Faculty and the School?
• For programmes where ‘fitness to practice’ is being assessed, is it clear that those involved in assessing in the final 2 years of the programme (and therefore confirming fitness for award) are qualified/trained to do so?
• Is the rationale underpinning how the learning, teaching and assessment elements fit together clear to both staff and students?
• How do students actively get involved in their own learning?
• How will the module/programme be ‘transformational’ for the student?
• How does the module/programme improve a student’s research abilities?
• Are there opportunities for student to consider their learning in a wider, forward looking, context?