Technology-Supported Processes for Agile and Responsive Curricula Core Aim 1
Core Aim 2
Informing programme design activity through the enhanced provision of pertinent information
Redesign of the ICT infrastructure which underpins the workflow of the curriculum design and programme approval processes
= Moodle
Core Aim 3
Core Aim 4
Electronic support for course team dialogue during their programme design activity
Electronic representation of programmes and underpinning evidence at (and leading up to) the point of approval
= Mahara
= SharePoint
The Ladder of Engagement Since we are using technologies already adopted by the University, we can concentrate on supporting the use of these technologies in new modes to support new workflows. This means that ‘stakeholder engagement’ is our highest priority; we are using the model below as a template for this engagement – it guides our communication plans and defines the type of activity needed to achieve a particular level of ‘buy-in’:
Anticipated Effect
Engagement tools
Stakeholder roles
Level of engagement
Notify
Inform
Stakeholders may encounter Stakeholders are regularly project publicity. and reliably informed, made aware of their rights and ways of participating in the project.
Consult Project staff obtain views of stakeholders. Stakeholders receive full feedback on decisions taken.
Involve
Collaborate
Project staff work with stakeholders through decision making processes to ensure views are understood and taken into account. Stakeholders as Stakeholders as project respondents. Designated team members. consultation time/space in Stakeholder appointment meetings. Feedback/right on project boards. of reply strategies. Some Stakeholders supported in dialogue with project staff their involvement through is expected. training.
Empower
All aspects of decision making processes are undertaken in partnership with stakeholders.
Stakeholders set agendas for change. Self organisation and responsibility over management is held by stakeholders. Stakeholders as passive Stakeholders as passive Stakeholders as Stakeholders as recipients of recipients of broadly collaborators. Stakeholders (independent) designers. uncontextualised contextualised on management Distributed decision information. Dialogue with information. Dialogue committees. Stakeholder making. Stakeholder project staff is not expected. with project staff is shaped policy making. managers. Stakeholder implicitly welcomed but Stakeholder interest/action ‘ownership’ of resources, not explicitly invited. groups. events, policies and learning. Occasional newsletters. Briefings. Regular blogs. Comment/opinion polls. Workshops. Voting. Active Stakeholder led Stakeholder managed Access to minutes and Targeted letters. Focus groups focus groups. Joint-lead consultations. Interviews consultation activities and documents. Static website. (stakeholders as consultations. Interviews open / closed (stakeholder tools development. respondents). Project staff (open). directed). Open forums. led consultation Rich picture activities. workshops. Project staff Away days with led questionnaires and stakeholders and project interviews. teams. Potential for peripheral Potential for informed, Widespread verifiable Emergent reaction data is Agendas emerge only from New mechanisms are general awareness. contextualised awareness. contextualised awareness. not framed exclusively by collaborative activity with established which are Emergence of reaction project staff. Stakeholder stakeholders. stakeholder owned. Project data. agendas are collected and is self-sustainable with no recognised. expectation of project team intervention.
Adapted from Rudd et al (2006)
Scope Because the focus of the T-SPARC project is curriculum design, it necessarily touches upon a whole raft of University work-streams. As such, the Project Team advance the aims of the T-SPARC project through working with all of the themes shown in the Wordle graphic to the right (centre bottom) through existing University working groups and committees.
Activity Committee and working group activities include: • Learning and Teaching Committee • Working group for the redesign of the review and approval mechanisms • Working group for the Learning Community initiative (student engagement) • RoLEx (Redesign of the Learning Experience) Project Board