Curriculum design supporting KCL

Report
Curriculum development: good
enough for KCL?
Deesha Chadha
King’s Learning Institute
King’s College London
Personal background
 Completed a PhD in engineering education and joined
KCL in 2005
 Took over as programme lead for GCAP (Graduate
certificate in academic practice) programme in 2006
 Modified programme
 Sought and gained accreditation at associate level
 Took over as programme lead for PGCAPHE (post
graduate certificate in academic practice in higher
education) programme in 2013
 Evaluating programme
 Preparing for re-accreditation
Structure
 The programme
 Evaluation
 Why?
 How?
 The changes
The PGCAPHE
 EAP (enhanced academic practice)
 Grounding in academic practice (theories of learning,
assessment, evaluation etc. )
 30-credits at level 7
 3 teaching observations
 5000 word assignment – case study or proposal
 PGCAPHE
 Appreciation of wider context of higher education (for
example employability, diversity, leadership & management)
 Two 15-credit modules at level 7 and associated assessments
Concerns identified by PTES scores
 The assignment was too difficult and took too much
time to prepare
 The marking criteria was not clear enough
 There were too many readings
 The programme was not practical enough
 Participants had no ownership of the programme
Evaluation strategy






Meeting with predecessor
Evaluation of written assignments
Evaluation by tutors
Evaluation by participants registered on EAP
Focus group involving participants on EAP
Focus group involving participants on PGCAPHE
Making change happen
What now?
 Proposed changes to the EAP
 Fewer readings (from 14 to 6)
 Refreshments served during each seminar and
participants gifted with book entitled ‘how learning
works’
 Introduction of ‘learning moment’ exercise
 Proposed changes to the modules
 More innovative forms of assessment
What next?
 Re-accreditation of PGCAPHE – working with the HEA
PSF
 Five seminars of 3 hours each rather than seven of 2
hours each
 Participants complete tasks following on from each
seminar session so they can build up a portfolio
 Micro-teaching sessions to be recorded, carried out in
tutor groups and to become more of a focal point of the
programme
Food for thought…
 Priority given to drivers for change
 What is the order of importance?
 Importance of understanding institutional context
 Areas of total disagreement
 Calls for professional judgement
Thank you for your attention

similar documents