Programme Handbook 2015-2016 Dr. Charles Buckley CELT POSTGRADUATE CERTIFICATE IN HIGHER EDUCATION (PGCERTHE)
1
Programme Handbook 2015-2016 Dr. Charles Buckley
CELT POSTGRADUATE CERTIFICATE IN HIGHER
EDUCATION (PGCERTHE)
2
Contents
1. The PGCertHE at Bangor University ...................................................................... 4
1.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 5
1.2. Collaboration and accreditation............................................................................... 6
1.3. Research-teaching links ........................................................................................... 7
1.4. The UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF) ....................................... 8
1.5. Outcomes for the Programme and stages .......................................................... 11
1.5.1. Programme outcomes ............................................................................................ 11
1.5.2. Stage 1: Teaching and Supporting Learning in Higher Education: Learning Outcomes ................................................................................................................. 11
1.5.3. Stage 2 Developing and Enhancing Academic and Professional Practice in Higher Education: Learning Outcomes ................................................................ 11
1.6. Criteria for Exemption ............................................................................................. 13
1.7. The CELT Unit ......................................................................................................... 14
1.8. Your Teaching Advisor ........................................................................................... 14
1.9. The CELT Tutor ....................................................................................................... 16
1.10. Booking and Registration ....................................................................................... 16
1.11. Welsh and English ................................................................................................... 16
1.12. Course structure ...................................................................................................... 16
2. Assessment .............................................................................................................. 19
2.1. Stage 1 Portfolio ...................................................................................................... 19
2.2. Stage 2 Portfolio ...................................................................................................... 21
2.3. Assessments in detail ............................................................................................. 22
2.3.1. Induction assignments ............................................................................................ 22
2.3.1.1. A short learning statement ......................................................................................... 22
2.3.1.2. Presentation: ............................................................................................................... 22
2.3.1.3. Poster: ......................................................................................................................... 22
2.3.2. Peer observations and Session Plans ................................................................. 23
2.3.3. Reflective and Evaluative account of teaching: .................................................. 23
2.3.4. Evaluation of workshops ........................................................................................ 24
2.3.5. Plan for Stage 2 .......................................................................................................... 25
2.3.6. Action-based research project (Stage 2 only) ............................................................ 25
2.3.7. Negotiated Assessment (Stage 2 only) ............................................................... 25
2.3.8. Presentation to colleagues (Stage 2) .......................................................................... 26
2.3.9. Revised Learning Statement and CPD Plan ............................................................... 26
2.3.10. Grid to show mapping against UKPSF (new for Sept 2015) ..................................... 27
2.3.11. Teacher Advisor letter/reference ........................................................................... 28
3
2.4. Assessment .............................................................................................................. 29
2.5. Submission of Portfolio ........................................................................................... 29
2.6. Referrals and Fails .................................................................................................. 29
3. Introductory Resources .......................................................................................... 30
3.1. Websites ................................................................................................................... 30
3.2. Key reading .............................................................................................................. 31
Appendix 1 PGCertHE Scheme Meeting with Teacher Advisor .................................... 33
Appendix 2 Peer Observation Form ................................................................................... 34
Appendix 3 Example Session Plan ..................................................................................... 38
Appendix 4 Evaluation of workshop (500 words) ............................................................. 40
4
1. The PGCertHE at Bangor University
5
1.1. Introduction
The award is supported by the newly formed Centre for the Enhancement of in Learning and Teaching (CELT) and located, for academic purposes within the School of Education. The aim of the PGCertHE is to support colleagues in developing practical skills and theoretical knowledge to become an effective teacher/lecturer in Higher Education. There is an emphasis on promoting innovative approaches to teaching and learning and developing colleagues as reflective practitioners. The programme is aligned with the UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF). In particular, it is mapped closely against the Areas of Activity, Core Knowledge and Professional Values within the Framework for Descriptors 1 and 2. It is also informed by the Aber-Bangor Learning and Teaching Strategy, and the Strategic Plan http://www.bangor.ac.uk/planning/strategic-plan/strategic-plan-english-web.pdf There is an emphasis Feedback during Induction and associated workshops on assessment and internationalisation. Through regular consultation with Y Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol, there is a clear route for Welsh-medium. It forms the core of the current development of an Aber-Bangor accredited CPD Framework. Completion of the PGCertHE confers Associate Fellow (Stage 1) and Fellowship Status (Stage 2) with the Higher Education Academy (HEA). Stage 1 and 2 are compulsory for staff appointed on academic teaching contracts at Bangor unless they are already Fellows of the Higher education Academy or have more than two years continuous teaching experience in UK higher education. Stage 1 (Associate Fellow) is an entitlement for all staff and postgraduate research students who teach and/or support learning wishing to gain professional recognition against the UKPSF. Stage 2 (Fellow) is an entitlement for all staff and postgraduate students (with substantive teaching hours) who support learning and wish to gain professional recognition against the UKPSF. The programme follows an action-research based learning model to support the initial and continuing professional development of staff engaged in teaching and supporting learning. Colleagues should ensure that they have sufficient teaching opportunities: 40 hours at Stage 1 (including preparation, contact and assessment time). 60 at Stage 2 (including preparation, contact and assessment time) this is important as the assessment is based on action research within the context of one’s own teaching experiences. The teaching experience must be varied enough and suitable to fit the requirements of the PGCertHE. If in doubt, please consult with the PGCertHE Director. Students will normally have a first degree in an appropriate subject or equivalent professional experience. Students who will go on to teach on NMC approved courses must be able to accumulate 12 weeks or 360 contact hours with students
6
The award is subject to Bangor University Regulations, Codes of Practice, Procedures, Guidelines and Rules for postgraduate programmes. Candidates should familiarise themselves with these https://www.bangor.ac.uk/ar/main/regulations/home.htm. In addition, colleagues should familiarise themselves with the Bangor University Research Ethics Policy particularly if intending to publish research conducted as part of the PGCertHE. Please direct queries relating to ethics to the Registrar’s Office in the first instance.
1.2. Collaboration and accreditation
The PGCertHE programme is offered to anyone who wishes to develop their knowledge and skills in the areas of teaching, learning and assessment, including academic staff, research assistants and postgraduates with sufficient teaching responsibilities. Working alongside an experienced Teaching Advisor and CELT Tutor, participants draw and build on experiences gained during their normal teaching duties to prepare a portfolio demonstrating innovative and reflective professional practice underpinned with relevant theoretical concepts. Successful completion of the programme leads to a Master’s level qualification in the form of a Postgraduate Certificate, as well as registration with the Higher Education Academy as a Fellow (FHEA). The PGCertHE scheme is accredited by both the Higher Education Academy and the Nursing and Midwifery Council. Colleagues seeking registration with the NMC should complete the record of teaching hours available from the PGCertHE Administrator/CELT Website.
7
1.3. Research-teaching links Bangor University recognises the importance of developing a research culture which articulates with teaching in a scholarly environment. The PGCertHE is designed to strengthen and augment this nexus and is deliberately planned to be flexible to maximize opportunities for sharing good practice in teaching and research across Bangor University and beyond. This articulates closely with the UK Professional Standards Framework philosophy: At Stage 2, the Action-based Research Project and Negotiated Assessment are designed to allow colleagues to show how their research and scholarship integrates with their teaching. If colleagues plan to disseminate research findings, which we encourage, they should consult with the Ethics Committee in their School for approval prior to data collection. The emphasis given to investigating the research-teaching nexus and providing guidance on pedagogical research are examples of how the PGCertHE provides research-related support within an overarching context of teaching. By closely aligning the programme with the school-based activities of the participants, the programme seeks to build strengths in teaching generally and in the discipline. The programme also enhances peer interaction within the institution and across the collaborating partners. In addition, the scheme incorporates an annual learning and teaching conference which provides another opportunity for sharing research and good practice with colleagues from a range of Schools across Bangor.
The CELT Unit works closely with both internal and external partners to promote good policy in equality and diversity. There are workshops offered during the year which are aimed specifically at promoting a deeper
8
understanding of key issues such as inclusive teaching strategies. Many workshops are based around the areas of activity, core knowledge and professional values contained in the UKPSF http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ukpsf and typically include sessions on themes such as assessment and feedback, designing for teaching small and large groups, evaluating your teaching, blended learning, and reflective practice.
1.4. The UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF) The PGCertHE is accredited by the Higher Education Academy (HEA), and participants successfully completing the programme are entitled to become a Fellow of the HEA (FHEA). Those who are entitled to exit the award after successful completion of the first 30 credits will be eligible to apply for Associate Fellowship status with the HEA. The UKPSF launched in February 2006, is a flexible model that uses a descriptor-based approach to professional standards. The UKPSF was proposed in the White Paper ‘The Future of Higher Education’ (2003). The UK HE funding bodies invited the Higher Education Academy to develop the Framework. It recognises the distinctive nature of teaching in higher education, respect for the autonomy of higher education institutions, and recognition of the sector’s understanding of quality enhancement for improving student learning.
The UKPSF provides a general description of the main dimensions of the roles of teaching and supporting learning within the HE environment. It is written from the perspective of the practitioner and outlines a national framework for comprehensively recognising and benchmarking teaching and learning support roles within Higher Education. The Framework has two components: The Descriptors, a set of statements outlining the key characteristics of someone evidencing four broad categories of typical teaching and learning support roles
9
within higher education and Dimensions of Practice outlining Areas of Activity, Core Knowledge and Professional Values. These have been applied to learning outcomes and assessment activities within the PGCertHE at Bangor University. The UKPSF underpins the whole award and it is crucial that colleagues make regular reference to the Framework as the course content, ethos and learning outcomes are aligned with the UKPSF. This is stressed at Induction and reinforced during the award. At the end of Stage 1, colleagues receive comprehensive feedback which indicates the extent to which they have engaged with the Framework and where they should focus at Stage 2 to ensure they fully engage with all the required Areas of Activity, Core Knowledge and Professional Values.
10
UK Professional Standards Framework for teaching and supporting learning in
higher education
(http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/ukpsf/ukpsf.pdf).
Areas of Activity
A1 Design and plan learning activities and/or
programmes of study
A2 Teach and/or support learning
A3 Assess and give feedback to learners
A4 Develop effective learning environments
and approaches to student support and
guidance
A5 Engage in continuing professional
development in subjects/disciplines and their
pedagogy, incorporating research,
scholarship and the evaluation of professional
practices
Core Knowledge
K1 The subject material
K2 Appropriate methods for teaching
and learning in the subject area and at
the level of the academic programme
K3 How students learn, both generally and
within their subject/disciplinary area(s)
K4 The use and value of appropriate
learning technologies
K5 Methods for evaluating the
effectiveness of teaching
K6 The implications of quality assurance
and quality enhancement for academic and
professional practice with a particular focus
on teaching
Professional Values
V1 Respect individual learners and
diverse learning communities
V2 Promote participation in higher
education and equality of opportunity for
learners
V3 Use evidence-informed approaches
and the outcomes from research,
scholarship and continuing professional
development
V4 Acknowledge the wider context in
which higher education operates
recognising the implications for
professional practice
11
1.5. Outcomes for the Programme and stages
1.5.1. Programme outcomes On successful completion of the award, participants should be able to: 1. Demonstrate critical awareness of the core knowledge associated with planning for effective learning and teaching. 2. Evidence their commitment to engagement in continuing professional development and how their practice is informed by discipline specific pedagogy, research-informed teaching, scholarly evaluation of practice in their discipline. 3. Critically reflect on their practice to show they understand and effectively use innovative approaches to enhance student engagement in learning. 4. Actively demonstrate a commitment to the Areas of Activity, Core Knowledge and Professional Values contained within the UK Professional Standards Framework
1.5.2. Stage 1: Teaching and Supporting Learning in Higher Education: Learning Outcomes
The module provides practitioners with Associate Fellowship status with the Higher Education Academy and is mapped against Descriptor 1 of the UKPSF
On successful completion of this stage, participants should be able
to:
UKPSF
1a Design and plan learning activities and/or programmes of study A1
1b Critically reflect on effective ways to teach and/or support
learning
A2
2a Demonstrate a core knowledge of teaching within their
discipline
K1
2b Demonstrate an awareness of a range of teaching and learning
methods at the level of the academic programme
K2
2c Demonstrate a critical understanding of how their students learn
most effectively
K3
3a Show a commitment to respecting individual learners and
diverse learning communities
V1
3b Critically reflect on what it means to promote participation in
higher education and equality of opportunity for learners
V2
3c Develop evidence-informed approaches and the outcomes from
research, scholarship and continuing professional development
V3
3d Acknowledge the wider context in which higher education
operates and recognise the implications for professional practice
V4
1.5.3. Stage 2 Developing and Enhancing Academic and
Professional Practice in Higher Education: Learning Outcomes
Successful completion of this module provides Fellowship status with the Higher education Academy and maps against Descriptors 1 and 2.
12
On successful completion of this stage, participants should be able
to:
UKPSF
1a Demonstrate their ability to use effective assessment methods
and give feedback to learners
A3
1b Show they can develop effective learning environments and
approaches to student support and guidance
A4
1c Demonstrate their commitment to continuing professional
development in their subject and their pedagogy, incorporating
research, scholarship and the evaluation of professional practice
A5
2a Demonstrate expertise in their chosen subject area and in
deploying a range of teaching and learning methods
K1 and 2
2b Show an ability to understand how their students learn most
effectively
K3
2c Critically reflect on the use and value of recent technology-
enhanced learning developments in Higher Education.
K4
2d Show an ability to critically analyse and apply a range of
methods for evaluating their teaching.
K5
2e Demonstrate critical understanding of quality assurance and
quality enhancement for academic practice with a focus on
teaching
K6
3a Demonstrate knowledge of and commitment to the professional
values contained within the UK professional standards
framework for teaching and supporting learning in Higher
Education.
V1-4
13
1.6. Criteria for Exemption
In order for new staff to be exempt from having to complete the PGCertHE Programme they must meet at least one of the following criteria:
2 + years consistent and substantial teaching experience in HE (this cannot be constituted as having been teaching at Bangor whilst registered for, and not successfully completing the PGCertHE).
Fellow of Higher Education Academy. Teachers arriving at Bangor with more than three years relevant experience in higher education and are not Fellows of the HEA should seek accreditation direct through the HEA Recognition Scheme and contact the CELT Unit in the first instance. The Induction at Bangor University is compulsory and marks the official starting point for the PGCertHE. It is from this point only that all elements of summative assessment start including the action research element of the portfolio. Candidates preparing for the PGCertHE or those waiting for a suitable induction date are encouraged to engage with the learning and teaching literature and liaise with PGCertHE staff to gain advice about how they might make the most effective use of their time prior to starting.
14
1.7. The CELT Unit
The PGCertHE programme is coordinated through the CELT Unit and School of
Education Current staff include:
Member of staff
Email Telephone Position
Professor Oliver Turnbull
[email protected] 3670 PVC Teaching and Learning
Dr Dave Perkins
[email protected] 2513 OER Leader
Dr Frances Garrad-Cole
[email protected] 8714 Assessment and Feedback
Dr Andy Webb
[email protected] 8624 Module Review and evaluation
Dr Charles Buckley
[email protected] 3086 Educational Developer and director PGCertHE
Dr Sue Clayton
[email protected] 2604 Head of Continuing Professional Development
Dr Thomas Caspari
[email protected] 2526 Educational Research
Dr Rosanna Robinson
[email protected] 3696 Mentoring program
Jo Caulfield [email protected] 8462 Student Engagement
Nic Kirby [email protected] 2002 Administrator
We offer, for both new and experienced academic staff, opportunities for the development and enhancement of skills and good practice in a range of aspects of teaching, learning and assessment. The CELT Unit promotes and conducts research into effective teaching & learning, and encourages and supports innovation to enhance the practice and understanding of effective teaching.
1.8. Your Teaching Advisor Following the induction, you will work alongside a Teacher Advisor. These are experienced staff who act as advisors to colleagues on the programme. Where you have been allocated a Mentor by your Head of School, that person can also act as the Teacher Advisor. You are expected to have a Teacher Advisor from
15
your own disciplinary area wherever possible. Please consult your Head of School to assign a suitable person. Advisors help in offering support about your engagement with the UKPSF and act as the first line of peer review and are able to offer feedback on the candidate’s portfolio. PhD supervisors would not normally act as an Advisor. It is expected that your Teacher Advisor will:
1. Have regular meetings with you (see Appendix 1) for template to record meetings).
i. the meetings are informal and can act as feedback about a teaching session or be an opportunity to discuss any issues raised about current teaching methods;
ii. it will be helpful to keep a record of all meetings and conversations about aspects of your progress.
2. Ensure that you are familiar with the areas of responsibility of colleagues in the School, reporting lines and “local” practices in respect of regulations relating to student learning.
3. Provide evaluative feedback to you on activities related to:
i. design of teaching sessions and other learner support action; ii. assessment and giving feedback to students; iii. activity to develop and extend the ethos of learning for personal
growth; iv. reflective practices and personal development.
4. Provide help (where needed) to organise opportunities for you to
observe or work alongside more experienced colleagues. The role should be interpreted flexibly. The primary consideration is to encourage and develop confidence in the teaching role in the context of the individual’s development as an academic. This also means offering guidance on such matters as:
5. Help in prioritising teaching, research and other responsibilities within the School;
6. Provide guidance on how best you might make contributions to the wider academic life of the University in formal and informal ways (e.g. committees, working groups and projects).
7. The Teaching Advisor should provide you with formative feedback on
the development of your portfolio throughout the scheme. Teaching Advisors also undertake peer observation of the participant during Stage 1 and provide a reference at the end of Stage 2.
16
1.9. The CELT Tutor
Each practitioner is assigned a Tutor from the CELT Unit with whom they can consult about issues relating to academic development, clarification about aspects of the course, assessment advice, pedagogical research and writing assignments and advice on networking opportunities. The CELT Tutor is also required to provide a peer observation at Stage 1 for colleagues for whom the award is compulsory. During the first Stage of the award there are Tutor meetings where coverage of the UKPSF is discussed as well as progress with broader issues.
1.10. Booking and Registration Application forms are available through the CELT Website and should be submitted to the PGCertHE Administrator. The PGCertHE is open to all staff teaching at any level, both full time and part time. However practitioners completing the full award must evidence a minimum of 100 hours teaching (including preparation, assessment, support of web-based learning etc) whilst enrolled on the whole programme. The teaching experience must be congruent with the learning outcomes of the PGCertHE which is based around action research, intervention and evaluation to enhance provision. Formal registration for the programme takes place prior to the Induction. To request and book a place on the programme please follow the links on the CELT website. Once a place has been allocated, participants should return the Confirmation Form at least four weeks before the date for the Induction (please refer to the PGCertHE Website for dates)
1.11. Welsh and English The PGCertHE is committed to the Bangor University’s strategy to promote learning and teaching through the medium of Welsh. There is the opportunity to take a Welsh-medium residential programme and a number of workshops in Welsh. Practitioners enrolling on the course are advised to liaise with the PGCertHE team to ensure that the workshops they choose fulfil the requirements of the UK Professional Standards Framework. In common with all Bangor University courses, assessed work may be submitted in either English or Welsh. Some colleagues to submit work bilingually. The staff coordinating the PGCertHE work closely with Y Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol who provide a range of suitable academic development workshops through the medium of Welsh.
1.12. Course structure Following the three induction days there are regular workshops offered by the CELT throughout the year. In addition, there is an annual PGCertHE Teaching and Learning Conference where colleagues are required to present some of their research. In addition to the academic development workshops running throughout the year there are also a range of other events organised through CELT and support sessions. There are also a range of other suitable events within Bangor and beyond on themes around learning and teaching. Some of
17
these are available online such as webinars and a selection are advertised on the PGCertHE website and Blackboard. The following table provides an overview of a typical award for Stage 1 and 2 including an indication of typical milestones.
18
Stage 1 Stage 2
Sem. 1 Sem 2 Sem. 3 Sem. 4
Induction Activities
Three-day induction at Bangor
Reflective and evaluative accounts of teaching
First account
Present First or second account at Conference
Second account
Third account
Pedagogic Research Project or negotiated study
CPD Workshops
Core Workshops (2 at stage 1, 4 per year at stage 2)
Advisor meetings
Advisor meetings (2 per sem.)
Teaching Observations
Observations by advisor
Observation by CELT Tutor if probationary requirement (1)
Observation by peer
Observations by you
Optional Group and Individual Meetings
Group or individual meetings with CELT Tutor
Individual meetings with Advisor
Grid to map against UKPSF (new from Sept 2015)
Plan for Stage 2
Revised Learning Statement
Submissions of Portfolio
Final preparation of portfolio
Advisor reads and writes reference (Stage 2)
Submission of portfolios
19
2. Assessment The PGCertHE is assessed through portfolios submitted at the end of each stage. A teaching portfolio is a personal record of your professional development as an HE educator. It consists of a carefully selected collection of material gathered from your teaching work. These are collated into a structured, evidenced presentation of your achievement of the learning outcomes for the programme. The PGCertHE is assessed via electronic portfolios because it provides a way for individual participants in different teaching contexts to evidence the development of their own expertise. The portfolio should be submitted electronically The Reflective and Evaluative Accounts of Teaching and Stage 1 and 2, Action-based Research Project and/or Negotiated Study MUST also be submitted through Turnitin via the PGCertHE Blackboard site. Most importantly, the portfolios should indicate that you have reflected on your experiences over the course of the Scheme, engaged suitably with the UKPSF and this has guided your thoughts about continuing professional development. Feedback from students should also be seen to guide this process. In addition, there needs to be evidence that you have engaged with relevant pedagogical and academic literature and indicated how this has influenced your teaching. The portfolio should be accessible to the reader and the use of a contents page is recommended with matching page numbers for relevant sections. Please use the referencing system adopted by your School ensuring correct conventions are applied. An exception to using your School referencing system would be during Stage 2 if you submit work which is written in the style of a journal article whereby the style adopted in the target journal should be used. In brief, the required content (please make sure you include all of the following as missing content will affect assessment and likely result in a referred portfolio) for the PGCertHE portfolio is:
2.1. Stage 1 Portfolio
Assessment Methods Stage 1 Learning Outcomes
1a 1b 2a 2b 2c 3a
3b 3c 3d
Portfolio of evidence (9,500 words
equivalent, excluding references) to
include the following:
x x x x x
x x
x x
Reflective Learning Statement and
feedback (500 words)
x x
Presentation and feedback 10 minutes (850
words equivalent) x x x x x
Poster at Induction with reflection on
feedback (1000 words equivalent) x x x x x
3 x Session Plans (300 words each) x x x x x x x x
20
3 peer observations (sessions are usually 1
or 2 hours with time for discussion before
and following the session typically half an
hour) 750 words each
x x x x x
x x
x x
Reflective and evaluative account of
teaching 2000 words x x x x x x x x x
2 evaluations of workshops/CPD events
500 words each x x x x
Grid to show mapping against UKPSF
(500 words) x x x x x x x x x
Plan for Stage Two 500 words x x x x
21
2.2. Stage 2 Portfolio
Assessment Methods Stage 2 Learning Outcomes
Portfolio of evidence (10,500 words
equivalent excluding reference lists and
Advisor letter) to include the following:
1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 3a
Teaching Advisor reference (1000words) x x x x
Reflection on Stage 1 (400 words)
2 x Reflective and evaluative account of
teaching (2000 words each) OR 1 x Action-
based Research Project (4000 words) OR
negotiated assessment (4000 words)
x x
x x x x x x x
Presentation to colleagues (10 minutes) 850
words equivalent
x x x x x x x x
2 peer observations 750 words each
(sessions are usually 1 or 2 hours with time
for discussion before and following the
session typically half an hour) and 2
associated Session Plans (300 words each)
x x x x x
CPD event/Workshop evaluations (4 per
year) 500 words each (estimate 2000 as
average completion time should be one year
for this stage)
x x x x x x x x
Grid to show mapping against UKPSF (500
words) x
x x x x x
x x x
Revised learning statement and plan for
continuing professional development 650
words
x x x x
22
2.3. Assessments in detail
2.3.1. Induction assignments
2.3.1.1. A short learning statement
(500 words) on the topic of your approach to learning and teaching is shared with other colleagues at the Induction. This learning statement represents the programme participants’ thoughts and perceptions on teaching and learning in higher education, in particular, in their subject area. It is intended to be reflective and to provide a basis for discussion. It will provide a baseline from which to develop professionally as a teacher and facilitator of learning. Programme participants will be given the opportunity in the first session of the Induction to discuss their and others’ statements. Any feedback they receive should be recorded and included in their portfolio along with the Statement itself. Five copies of the essay will be required at the Induction.
2.3.1.2. Presentation:
During the Induction, each programme participant will give a ten-minute presentation to a small group on a topic relating to their teaching and learning. The presentation may be delivered in any way chosen by participant. Participants will be given the opportunity to decide with their peers the type of feedback they would like to receive, but it will probably include the strengths and weaknesses of the content, style, form and delivery. Feedback will be given at the end of each presentation and should be recorded and included in the portfolio along with the presentation itself and a short reflective account. PowerPoint, Prezi, can be used and there will be laptops and flipcharts will all be available and it is up to the individual as to what resources they chose to use – it is as perfectly acceptable to stand and talk without visual aids as it is to bring a pre-prepared PowerPoint presentation.
2.3.1.3. Poster:
During the induction, participants present an A1 flipchart outlining their plan for their first proposed reflective and evaluative account of teaching It should include: • A description and evaluation of present teaching situation and participant’s reasons for wishing to undertake development • The teaching innovation participant wishes to apply supported by theoretical underpinning • The evaluation method participant will use to assess its success Word processed A4 versions of the poster should be available as handouts at the presentation. The posters will be discussed within a small group and feedback should be recorded and included in the portfolio. Programme participants should include in their portfolios, an A4 copy of the poster, personal
23
reflections and any modifications made to the action plan following the discussion.
2.3.2. Peer observations and Session Plans
Each participant is expected to submit peer observations using the template (Appendix 2) with associated session plans. (see Appendix 3 for an example). The peer observations have 4 sections to them: • A summary of the session being observed including learning outcomes and areas that require feedback • Feedback from the observer • A joint discussion between the observer and teacher about the feedback provided • An action plan by the teacher for future sessions. Teaching observations may be undertaken in any order and at any point during the award (it is recommended however, that they are evenly spread to allow for evaluation and reflection), involving teaching in any context (not only lectures but seminars, tutorials, supervisions, practical classes, fieldwork, video conferencing or e-learning activities). In the case of a one-to-one event, permission should be asked of the student involved. Template forms and Session Plans are available in this Handbook and on the PGCertHE website. Each teaching observation form should be included in the portfolio. It is particularly important to complete the reflective elements of the teaching observation form.
2.3.3. Reflective and Evaluative account of teaching:
Much of the learning in the programme is work-based. The programme participant’s normal teaching duties provide the context for teaching interventions, which form some of evidence base for the portfolio. The method used for the teaching interventions, action research, is one of self-reflective enquiry in cycles of planning, acting, observing and reflecting to improve the understanding and quality of one’s own educational practice. Action plans, specified in terms of expected outcomes, allow interim modifications to be made, and actual outcomes are recorded, interpreted and reviewed for future application. Reflective practitioners automatically use such planning and reviewing activities as part of their professional behaviour. For the purposes of the PGCertHE, this assessment is important evidence of the participant’s developing knowledge and skills of teaching and learning in their particular context, as well as their ability to evaluate practice and develop professionally. Choosing appropriate areas of focus for the reflective account, Project or Negotiated Study is therefore crucial to producing a successful portfolio. A suggested structure for the report (although this is open to individual interpretation) is:
24
1. An account of the issue including reference to appropriate literature on teaching and learning in HE.
2. A plan highlighting proposed teaching practice, intended outcomes and method of evaluation.
3. Progress notes on teaching practice and any interim modifications. 4. Summary of relevant data and feedback on student learning. 5. Evaluation of student learning experience in relation to intended outcomes. 6. Comments on implications for professional development of teaching
practice. The report should be underpinned by relevant theoretical analysis using a suitable range of learning and teaching literature. The length of each report should be approximately 2000 words (excluding references) and be referenced using the Harvard style. The report can be written in the style of an article to be submitted for publication. The style of presentation is flexible although it should provide a coherent analysis of the situation, present a clear argument and demonstrate a good command of grammatical conventions. Regardless of format, the report should demonstrate an understanding of how aspects of pedagogical theory inform practice. This should be commensurate with working at postgraduate level. Reflective and Evaluative Accounts can be presented as a report. One of the accounts may be presented in the form of a poster. The CELT Unit encourage a flexible approach to the style used to produce reports which may take the form of an academic journal article. The assessment can be presented in many ways and if you have an innovative approach you wish to trial for presenting, please consult with your CELT Tutor.
2.3.4. Evaluation of workshops Programme participants are required to attend and evaluate workshops identified as counting for the PGCertHE during the programme. The series of workshops is designed to address the key requirements of the UKPSF. The workshops offer the opportunity to engage with current scholarship and practice in higher education in order to inform participants’ approaches to understanding student learning in their own specific context. Knowledge gained from the workshops provides a useful basis for preparing the portfolio. Participants need to provide an evaluation of each workshop (one to two pages). The evaluation should be presented in a suitable format although the subheadings are not prescribed. Should you prefer to use a template, please see Appendix 4. Evaluations will likely report on things such as implications for the participant’s teaching, critical comment on the potential of the theoretical underpinnings presented and any planned interventions as a result of attending the workshop. The evaluations should be submitted in the end-of-course portfolios. You will be issued with a certificate of attendance; a photocopy of this should be included with each evaluation. The workshops are delivered by the programme team, internal and external trainers. Please see the CELT website for updated lists of workshops. There are also workshops offered through Y Coleg as well as the Learning Technology Team. In addition there are events which can support your professional development and coverage of the UKPSF with external providers such as JISC and the HEA.
25
2.3.5. Plan for Stage 2 Regardless of whether colleagues are continuing with Stage 2 or not, the portfolio should provide a plan which looks forward and outlines how the action research and reflection incorporated during the first Stage could be developed further. Colleagues who exit at this stage might re-engage at a later date and the purpose of this exercise is to reflect on the lessons learnt during Stage 1 and indicate what the next steps might be. The way this section is structured is flexible although it should give a clear indication of the way in which the project (s) at Stage 2 will be implemented whether it be two more reflective accounts, an Action-based Research-Project or Negotiated Assessment. The focus here should be on the two planned Reflective and Evaluative Accounts of Teaching, Action-based Research Project or negotiated Study. Please ensure you make reference to how you plan to cover the remaining elements of the UKPSF.
2.3.6. Action-based research project (Stage 2 only)
At Stage 2, practitioners have the choice of continuing with two more reflective and evaluative accounts to follow the one they produced for Stage 1. Alternatively, they can opt to work on a pedagogical action research project which should be written as a potentially publishable article for a learning and teaching journal. This provides an opportunity for colleagues to focus in more depth over stage 2 into a specific area of pedagogic research and it would be expected that there will be a critical engagement with appropriate literature with a sound methodology and method to underpin the project.
2.3.7. Negotiated Assessment (Stage 2 only) This assessment aims to enable practitioners to explore an aspect of their current practices of research within their discipline and show how these have influenced their learning and teaching practice. Practitioners will critically evaluate different research approaches and consider the impact of these on their academic practice. The focus of the study should be negotiated with the practitioner’s Advisor with the support of the CELT Tutor prior to starting Stage 2. It is important that practitioners obtain approval from their CELT Tutor prior to starting the Negotiated Assessment to ensure that it is likely to meet the learning outcomes. Colleagues can select an appropriate mode of assessment to demonstrate critical and professional understanding in this area ensuring that the work is equivalent to 4000w. Topics might include:
What is research and how can it influence student learning?
Involving students in the research process.
Disciplinary research collaborations and their potential for enhancing the
student learning experience.
Exploring the differences between pedagogic and disciplinary research.
Using research methodology to help structure student learning
Collaborative research with students
26
Supervising research students
Submissions will be assessed against the learning outcomes for this module. The table below indicates how some of the learning outcomes might be applied to this study.
Example: Stage 2 Outcomes Example assessment
1.c. Demonstrate their commitment to continuing professional development in their subject and their pedagogy, incorporating research, scholarship and the evaluation of professional practice
Identify the philosophical underpinnings associated with your disciplinary research and indicate how these might inform your university practice.
2.b. Show an ability to understand how their students learn most effectively
Indicate how your research practice has been used to inform module assessments, planning for teaching and develop a deeper approach to learning amongst your students.
2.c. Critically reflect on the use and value of recent technology-enhanced learning developments in Higher Education.
Demonstrate critically how your practice has evolved to embrace a more blended approach to teaching and facilitating student learning.
2.d. Show an ability to critically analyse and apply a range of methods for evaluating their teaching.
Critically evaluate feedback from student evaluations about your research and reflect upon ways in which this has influenced your teaching practices.
2.3.8. Presentation to colleagues (Stage 2) At Stage 2, you should provide an account of a 10 minute presentation of your first or second reflective and evaluative account of teaching or progress on your action-based research project or Negotiated Assessment). This can be at a PGCertHE event such as the Induction to new colleagues when you are part way through your award or to colleagues in your School. If you are presenting at a conference, you might choose this as an opportunity to disseminate your PGCertHE work and gain feedback. It is up to you to organise this in liaison with your Teaching Adviser and CELT Tutor. You should write this as a short report (include your slides/resources if you wish) including any ideas/feedback you received to help inform your practice.
2.3.9. Revised Learning Statement and CPD Plan The PGCertHE is designed to encourage you to become a more reflective practitioner and develop yourself to better understand the student learning experience. This statement should show how involvement in the course has affected your thinking about student learning in higher education and what development opportunities you plan to follow in your future teaching career.
27
2.3.10. Grid to show mapping against UKPSF (new for
Sept 2015) This is a brief resume of the activities, which provide examples of how you have evidenced the UKPSF holistically across the dimensions and descriptors. At least 2 Areas of Activity must be evidenced at the end of Stage 1 together with appropriate areas of Core Knowledge and Professional Values. At the end of Stage 2, you should There must be a minimum of 6 and maximum of 12 contrasting activities, which demonstrate the depth, and breadth of your contribution to teaching and learning. You must reference the relevant dimension of practice A, K, V.
Activity A1-5 K 1-6 V 1-4
e.g. initiated a series of short formative assessment activities for the students in Module AB1234.
A1, A3 K2, K3 V1, V2
e.g. attended CPD workshop facilitated by Kate Exely November 2015 on Principles of Assessment and, following this, have introduced informal peer reviewing with students. Held focus groups with some of the students during the module to obtain their feedback on the initiative.
A1, A2, A3, A5 K1, K2, K3, K5 V1, V2, V3
e.g. comments from Teaching Advisor during peer observation suggested more variety needed in some of the slides used for PowerPoint presentation. As follow-up, have embedded some video clips within the presentation and incorporated
A1, A2, A3, A4 K1, K2, K3, K4 V1, V2
28
more images into some slides
e.g. listened to recorded webinar on learning and teaching from (locate source/provide link) and have evaluated this. The session covered key issues in enhancing quality assurance and enhancement in HE teaching. The presentation offered a series of short cases from different universities
A5 K1, K2, K4, K6 V3, V4
2.3.11. Teacher Advisor letter/reference Your Advisor writes this letter when they have read your final portfolio and is an endorsement from them about the extent to which the work meets the assessment criteria contained in the award. In addition, it should reflect the ways in which your portfolio maps against the UKPSF. Advisors are also welcome to provide an overview of the ways in which you have developed your own practice, worked with students and staff within your School and perhaps beyond to enhance the learning experience of students. In this way, the reference is mostly about how the portfolio meets the criteria for the award which is why working closely with your Advisor throughout is important and that they have access to your written materials and not just your teaching through the peer observation system.
29
2.4. Assessment
Portfolios submitted by practitioners who started September 2014 or later are assessed using the new Bangor University Categorical marking Scheme and mapped against the guidelines contained within: www.bangor.ac.uk/regulations/regulations/reg01.php.en Please see Appendix 5 and 6 which specify the criteria for assessment and Descriptors for Stage 1 and 2 respectively.
2.5. Submission of Portfolio
There are two submission opportunities per year. The portfolio should be submitted at any point specified by the CELT Unit. Stage 1 should be completed in one year Stage 2 can be completed in up to a further two years. If candidates do not submit within the three-year period will fail by default. Should there be extenuating circumstances and a request for an extension, there will need to be a form endorsed by the Teaching Advisor, Head of School and PGCertHE Director). Forms are available from the administrator of the PGCertHE. Candidates should indicate their intention to submit and requests for extensions at least 8 weeks before the intended submission date so that appropriate assessors from adjoining disciplines can be booked. Please indicate on the form if you intend to submit through the medium of Welsh so that Welsh-speaking assessors can be approached. Forms are available from the administrator.
2.6. Referrals and Fails Where assessors judge that a portfolio does not meet the requirements to achieve a pass, the portfolio is referred. Referred portfolios will also be read by the internal moderator, and where the referral is agreed by the Examination Board, the candidate will be informed and given guidance concerning what needs to be done to demonstrate performance of the learning outcomes. Referred portfolios and fails must be re-submitted within one year of the initial submission date. Portfolios may be resubmitted on one occasion. For those who do not pass following the re-submission deadline for whom the PGCertHE is a requirement of probation, the candidate must re-register for the PGCertHE as they would not be deemed to have reached the necessary level of competency expected by Bangor University.
30
3. Introductory Resources
3.1. Websites
Higher Education Academy (HEA) http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ The Academy's role is to be a nationwide focus for enhancing teaching, learning and students' experiences in higher education. They work with institutions, discipline groups and individual staff within the four countries of the UK.
Staff and Educational Development Association (SEDA) http://www.seda.ac.uk/ SEDA is the professional association for staff and educational developers in the UK, promoting innovation and good practice in higher education.
Jorum is an online portal sharing and discussing learning and teaching resources, shared by the UK Further and Higher Education community.http://www.jorum.ac.uk/
Joint Information Systems Committee http://www.jisc.ac.uk/ The mission of the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) is to provide world-class leadership in the innovative use of ICT to support education and research.
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education http://www.qaa.ac.ukThe mission of the QAA is to safeguard the public interest in sound standards of higher education qualifications and to inform and encourage continuous improvement in the management of the quality of higher education.
Technical Advisory Service for Images http://www.tasi.ac.uk/training/training.html The Technical Advisory Service for Images is a JISC funded service. It provides advice and guidance to the UK's Further and Higher Education community on the issues of: Creating digital images (including raster, vector and animated formats); Delivering digital images to users; using digital images to support teaching, learning and research and managing both small and large scale digitisation projects.
Deliberations http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/deliberations/ is an international website on issues of learning and teaching for the higher education community.
Centre for Recording Achievement http://www.recordingachievement.org/ is a national network organisation and a registered educational charity. It seeks to ‘promote the awareness of recording achievement and action planning processes as an important element in improving learning and progression throughout the world of education, training and employment’.
31
3.2. Key reading
There is a more extensive reading list on the CELT website
Essential Reading (in Library) Core texts:
Fry, H., Ketteridge, S, and Marshall, S. (2008) A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (3rd Edition) London, Routledge
McDowell, L., Sambell, K. and Montgomery, C. (2011) Assessment for Learning in Higher Education: A Practical Guide to Developing Learning Communities. London, Routledge
Norton, L. (2008) Action Research in Teaching and Learning: A Practical Guide to Conducting Pedagogical Research in Universities London, Routledge
Race, P (2006) The Lecturer’s Toolkit, (3rd edition), London: Kogan Page.
Salmon, G. (2011) E-Moderating The Key to Teaching and Learning Online, 3rd Edition London, Routledge
Salmon, G. (2013) E-tivities: The Key to Active Online Learning (2nd Edition) London, Routledge
Recommended reading:
Barrett, T and Moore, S. (2010) New Approaches to Problem-based Learning: Revitalizing your Practice in Higher Education. London, Routledge
Beetham, H. and Sharpe, R. (Editors) 2nd Edition (2013) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing for 21st Century Learning London Routledge.
Campbell, A. and Norton, L. (2007) Learning, Teaching and Assessing in Higher Education: Developing Reflective Practice (Teaching in Higher Education): Developing Reflective Practice London, Learning Matters Limited
Cousin, G. (2008) Researching Learning in Higher Education: An Introduction to Contemporary Methods and Approaches. London Routledge
Fisher, A. Exely, K. and Clobanu, D. (2013) Using Technology to Support learning and Teaching. London Taylor and Francis.
Harland, T. (2012) University Teaching: An Introductory Guide. London Routledge
Hunt, L and Chalmers, D. (2012) University Teaching in Focus. London Routledge
Kreber, C. (Editor) (2009) The University and it's Disciplines. Teaching and Learning within and Beyond Disciplinary Boundaries. London Routledge
Light G, Cox, R. and Calkin, S. (2009) Learning and Teaching in Higher Education The Reflective Professional London Sage
Means, B., Bakia, M. and Murphy, R. (2014) Learning Online. What Research tells us about Whether, When and How. London Routledge
32
Mortiboys, A. (2011) second edit. Teaching with Emotional Intelligence London Routledge
Littlejohn, A. and Pedlar, C. (2014) Preparing for Blended e-learning: Understanding Blended and Online Learning (Connecting with E-Learning). London Routledge
Savin-Baden, M. (2007) A Practical Guide to Problem-Based Learning Online. London Routledge
Schiller, M Cockell, J and McArthur Blair, J. (2012) Appreciative Inquiry London Routledge
Key Journals
Active Learning in Higher Education
Gwerddon
Higher Education Quarterly
Innovations in Education and Teaching International
Internet and Higher Education
Journal of Further and Higher Education
Studies in Higher Education
33
Appendix 1 PGCertHE Scheme Meeting with Teacher Advisor (This form is available electronically from the CELT/ PGCertHE website)
Name: …………………………………………….. Date: ……………………………….. This form records the purposes and outcomes of a meeting with your Teacher Advisor. What do you want to get out of this meeting? Topics for discussion. Outcomes and planned actions How well is the UKPSF being covered?
Please ask your Teacher Advisor to countersign this form. The top sheet should be kept in your Portfolio The copy should be given to your Teacher Advisor
34
Appendix 2 Peer Observation Form
PGCertHE programme Please complete this form and forward it to the observer before the session.
Name
Date Module/Course Unit
Level / Year
Mode e.g. Full time Part time
Composition of the student group
Type of activity, e.g. lecture, Seminar
Topic Number of Students
Observer Length of the session Hours Minutes
Length of the observation Hours Minutes
What are the objectives planned for this session (e.g. knowledge and understanding, key skills, cognitive skills, and subject specific, including practical/professional skills)? Indicate how they contribute to supporting students in achieving expected learning outcomes in the session or module.
How do these learning objectives relate to the Programme Specification and other modules?
As well as general observations, on what particular aspects would you like feedback? 1. 2. 3.
35
PEER OBSERVATION : Reflection and Discussion The lecturer, following discussion with the observer, should complete this form. A copy should be given to the observer.
1. What did you feel were the most important points in your discussions with the observer? 2. Will you make changes to any of the following? If so, what? If not, why? a) the particular or similar sessions b) the module programme c) to your teaching more generally 3. Any other comments about the observation.
Feedback to help the observer to be more effective in fulfilling this role in the future
36
Observation and Feedback
Prompts Strengths and points for improvement where relevant in the context of the session
Clarity of objectives. Content ( currency, accuracy, relevance, use of examples, level to match to student needs) Planning, organisation and structure, links. Methods / approach. Delivery and pace. Level of 'challenge' to students. Student participation/engagement. Use of resources, e.g. time, space, equipment Other points as requested 1. 2. 3.
37
Observation notes: Please comment on the session in relation to the learning objectives:
Observation and Feedback
Please summarise the key points from your observation for discussion with your colleague
Overall quality and the strengths of the teaching in relation to the objectives:
Suggestions for enhancing the teaching and learning.
Observer: Name
Signature Date
38
Appendix 3 Example Session Plan
Session Plan Topic: Bangor Programme Introduction Aim: To introduce the course and key ideas in teaching and learning within local and wider contexts Learning Outcomes: you will be able to:
Understand the course aims, ethos , structure and expectations
Consider Bangor and wider contexts of learning and teaching in H.E.
Engage with key concepts of reflective practice and aligned session planning.
Reflect on your own conceptions of the teaching role and professional needs.
Time: Content T & L Methods Resources Assessment1
10.00 10.20 10.30 11.15 11.30 11.45
Welcome , introductions, session overview
Bangor and wider contexts for learning and teaching in H.E.
PGCertHE course aims and expectations: what is a Reflective and Evaluative Account of Teaching?
The Reflective Practitioner Introduction to planning learning Next steps
Warm up activity ( all) Presentation Presentation and discussion Active learning: Whole group activity Small group activity Presentation
PowerPoint and Projector Handbook Web links Handouts Post its and flip chart Session Plan example & blank pro-formas
Question and answer Draft Learning Statements and session plans to discuss in tutorial groups.
1At the session level this is usually linked to formative assessment techniques –checking understanding - could be tutor, peer or self assessment
39
Reflections:
Did the plan work/go to plan? If not why?
What went well and why?
What didn’t go so well and why?
What would you do differently next time and why
40
Appendix 4 Evaluation of workshop (500 words)
What were the strengths of the session? How might it be developed to be more relevant to you?
What are the implications for your continuing professional development following attendance at this event? How might this event inform your teaching? How do feel that the theoretical underpinnings of this session were integrated with practical aspects of learning and teaching?
41
Appendix 5. Marking Criteria PGCertHE XVE 4008/XVC4008 Teaching and Learning in H E/Addysgu a Dysgu Mewn A. U.
Categorical Mark
Degree Class Master’s
General Overview
within class
Primary marking criteria
Secondary marking criteria Descriptor
A* Distinction Outstanding Comprehensive knowledge
Detailed understanding of the subject area
Extensive background study
Highly focussed answer and well structured
Logically presented and defended arguments
No factual/computational errors
Original interpretation
New links between topics are developed
New approach to a problem
Excellent presentation with very accurate communication
Exceeds expectations for most primary criteria
Complete command of subject and other relevant areas
Ideas/arguments are highly original
The work is exceptionally well-written and presented. The work demonstrates that the practitioner has an excellent understanding of planning for learning activities and/or programmes of study in their discipline and how students learn most effectively. There will be outstanding examples of innovative practice which show an excellent knowledge and critical understanding of how students learn most effectively. There is an excellent commitment to continued professional development. The research which has been presented is likely to be of a quality suitable for publication There should be outstanding engagement with relevant pedagogical literature. There is also excellent evidence that they can employ and effectively evaluate a wide range of methods for their teaching. There are excellent examples of innovative thinking in the practices of the practitioner who has shown that they readily respond to others’ comments
A+ Excellent Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria
Complete command of subject
ideas/arguments are highly original
A Good Meets all primary criteria
Command of subject but with minor gaps in knowledge
Ideas/arguments are mostly original
A- Meets requirements
of Class
Meets most but not all primary criteria
Command of subject but with some gaps in knowledge
Ideas/arguments are mostly original
42
and have embedded evaluation in their professional practice. The portfolio is outstanding and shows evidence of independent critical thought and excellent levels of reflection throughout. There is a clear commitment to respecting individual learners and insightful analysis of the wider context in which higher education operates.
B+ Merit Good Strong knowledge
Understands most but not all of the subject area
Evidence of background study
Focussed answer with good structure
Arguments presented coherently
Mostly free of factual/computational errors
Some limited original interpretation
Well known links between topics are described
Problems addressed by existing methods/approaches
Good presentation with accurate communication
Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria
Command of subject but with gaps in knowledge
Some ideas/arguments are original
The work is sound and convincing, well-written and presented. There is good evidence of the practitioner having a sound knowledge how to plan effectively for student learning in their discipline. There will be examples of very good practice which reflects the practitioner understands of how students learn. The practitioner will have shown a commitment to continued professional development and there is sound evidence that background research and study has informed practice. Appropriate methods of evaluation should be evident to augment a sound knowledge of teaching methods. There should be evidence of critical thinking and innovative practices which have been informed by suitable levels of reflection .There will be a clear acknowledgement of the wider
B Mid-level Meets all primary criteria
Strong factual knowledge and understanding
Ideas/arguments are well presented but few are original
B- Meets requirements
of Class
Meets most but not all primary criteria
Strong factual knowledge with minor weaknesses in understanding
Most but not all ideas/arguments are well presented and few are original
43
context in which higher education operates and examples of showing respect for individual learners.
C+ Pass Good within the Class
Knowledge of key areas/principles
Understands the main elements of the subject area
Limited evidence of background study
Answer focussed on question but also with some irrelevant material and weaknesses in structure
Arguments presented but lack coherence
Has several factual/computational errors
No original interpretation
Only major links between topics are described
Limited problem solving
Some weaknesses in presentation and accuracy
Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria
Strong factual knowledge with some weaknesses in understanding
Ideas/arguments are limited but are well presented
The work will be reasonably well-presented and text will be clear, but may be flawed by some grammatical errors that nevertheless do not obscure the meaning. There may be some factual errors and shortcomings in terms of coverage of issues although the work will demonstrate sufficient knowledge of some key issues in learning and teaching. The practitioner will demonstrate knowledge of key issues associated with planning for effective learning. They should show that they have a suitable understanding of the ways in which students learn. There should be some engagement with continuing professional development activity and evidence that work has been informed by research and scholarship although this will likely be underdeveloped. The practitioner will show that they have the ability to be reflective although this is likely to be limited and not feedback effectively into their practice. There will be some evidence of showing their commitment to
C Mid-Level Matches all primary criteria
Moderate factual knowledge with some weaknesses in understanding
Ideas/arguments are limited with weaknesses in logic/presentation
C- Meets requirements
of class
Matches most but not all primary criteria
Moderate factual knowledge with several weaknesses in understanding
Ideas/arguments are limited with weaknesses in logic/presentation
44
respecting individual learners and an acknowledgement of the wider context in which higher education operates although this will be limited.
D+ Compensatable fail
Good within the Class
Knowledge of key areas/principles only
Weaknesses in understanding of the subject area
Limited evidence of background study
Answer only poorly focussed on question and with some irrelevant material and poor structure
Arguments presented but lack coherence
Several factual/computational errors
No original interpretation
Only major links between topics are described
Limited problem solving
Many weaknesses in presentation and accuracy
For PGT - Insufficient to fulfil
Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria
Moderate factual knowledge with several weaknesses in understanding
A few ideas/arguments are presented but with weaknesses
There will be some factual errors. Significant grammatical and/or structural deficiencies may mar the text, leaving the reader to have too much to do to discern the intended sense of the argument. There will be evidence that the practitioner has a basic grasp of the ways in which students learn in their discipline but with several shortcomings. There will be an indication that they have some insights into the key issues associated with planning for effective learning although this will have limited scope. There will be a limited level of examples and indicators of understanding about the ways in which students learn most effectively. There will be limited engagement with continuing professional development and whilst research and scholarship forms part of their practice, it is mostly lacking and arguments are personalized. There will be a superficial level of reflection evident although the practitioner will struggle to show how this has informed their practice and
D Mid-level Matches all primary criteria
Limited factual knowledge with several weaknesses in understanding
Very few ideas/arguments are presented
D- Meets requirements
of Class
Matches most but not all primary criteria
Limited factual knowledge with many weaknesses in understanding
Very few ideas/arguments are presented and with errors in logic/presentation
45
the associated learning outcomes
development. There will be a little evidence that they have shown a commitment to respecting individual learners and understanding how higher education operates in the wider community.
E Fail Borderline fail/Non-
compensatable fail
Insufficient to fulfil the associated learning outcomes
Deficiencies in knowledge even of key areas/principles
No evidence of understanding, even of main areas
No evidence of background study
Answer relies on tangential material and lacks a coherent structure
No arguments presented
Many factual/computational errors
No original interpretation
No links between topics are described
No attempt to solve problems
The presentation is very weak containing many inaccuracies
Exceeds expectations for most primary criteria
Very limited factual knowledge with many weaknesses in understanding
Weak attempt to answer/address question
The portfolio is poorly presented and structured and there are grammatical errors. There is limited evidence of effective planning and little indication that the practitioner understands the ways in which students learn most effectively. Engagement with continuing professional development activities will be very limited and there will be inadequate use of research and scholarship to inform their practice. The practitioner will show a limited ability to use reflective practice to inform their practice and there will be inadequate commitment to showing they have the ability to respect individual learners and understand the way in which higher education operates in the wider community.
F Fail/non-compensatable
fail
Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria
Major gaps in knowledge/understanding
Very weak attempt to answer/address question
F (1)
Fail/non-compensatable
fail
Matches all primary criteria
Very limited evidence of knowledge/understanding
Ideas/arguments are largely irrelevant to question
The portfolio is very poorly presented with frequent errors in grammar and an illogical structure. There is little evidence of understanding the ways in which students learn and serious flaws in planning for learning. The work
46
makes unsupported assertions and statements. There is little engagement with continuing professional development and reflection is mostly absent. The practitioner shows little attempt to respect individual learners or acknowledge the way higher education operates in the wider community.
F (2) Poor fail (non-compensatable
Matches some primary criteria
No evidence of relevant knowledge/understanding
Ideas/arguments are irrelevant to question
F (3) Very poor fail (non-
compensatable
Matches very few primary criteria
No evidence to demonstrate even cursory knowledge or understanding
No attempt to answer/address question
47
Appendix 6. Marking Criteria PGCertHE XVE 4009/XVC4009 Enhancing Academic Practice/Gwella Ymafer Academaidd
Categorical Mark
Degree Class Master’s
General Overview
within class
Primary marking criteria
Secondary marking criteria Desriptor
A* Distinction Outstanding Comprehensive knowledge
Detailed understanding of the subject area
Extensive background study
Highly focussed answer and well structured
Logically presented and defended arguments
No factual/computational errors
Original interpretation
New links between topics are developed
New approach to a problem
Excellent presentation with very accurate communication
Exceeds expectations for most primary criteria
Complete command of subject and other relevant areas
Ideas/arguments are highly original
The work is exceptionally well-written and presented. The work demonstrates that the practitioner has an excellent understanding of learning and teaching in their discipline and how students learn most effectively. They will show excellent examples of practice in assessing and providing feedback to students and commitment to excellence and regard for quality assurance issues. There is an excellent commitment to continued professional development. The research which has been presented is likely to be of a quality suitable for publication . There should be outstanding engagement with relevant pedagogical literature. There is also excellent evidence that they can employ and effectively evaluate a wide range of methods for their teaching including engagement with recent developments in technology. There are excellent examples of innovative thinking in the practices of the practitioner who has shown that they readily respond to others’ comments and have embedded evaluation in their professional practice. The portfolio is
A+ Excellent Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria
Complete command of subject
ideas/arguments are highly original
A Good Meets all primary criteria
Command of subject but with minor gaps in knowledge
Ideas/arguments are mostly original
A- Meets requirements
of Class
Meets most but not all primary criteria
Command of subject but with some gaps in knowledge
Ideas/arguments are mostly original
48
outstanding and shows evidence of independent critical thought and excellent levels of reflection throughout. There is a clear commitment to and excellent knowledge of the Values contained in the UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF).
B+ Merit Good Strong knowledge
Understands most but not all of the subject area
Evidence of background study
Focussed answer with good structure
Arguments presented coherently
Mostly free of factual/computational errors
Some limited original interpretation
Well known links between topics are described
Problems addressed by existing methods/approaches
Good presentation with accurate communication
Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria
Command of subject but with gaps in knowledge
Some ideas/arguments are original
The work is sound, convincing and well-written and presented. There is good evidence of the practitioner having a sound knowledge of student learning in their discipline and good examples of using assessment and feedback methods appropriately. The work shows that there is a good understanding of quality assurance issues. The practitioner will have shown a commitment to continued professional development and there is sound evidence that background research and study has informed practice. Appropriate methods of evaluation should be evident to augment a sound knowledge of teaching methods including engagement with suitable technology to support their teaching. There should be evidence of critical thinking and innovative practices which have been informed by suitable levels of reflection The work should indicate that there is a sound knowledge of and commitment to the Values within the UKPSF.
B Mid-level Meets all primary criteria
Strong factual knowledge and understanding
Ideas/arguments are well presented but few are original
B- Meets requirements
of Class
Meets most but not all primary criteria
Strong factual knowledge with minor weaknesses in understanding
Most but not all ideas/arguments are well presented and few are original
49
C+ Pass Good within the Class
Knowledge of key areas/principles
Understands the main elements of the subject area
Limited evidence of background study
Answer focussed on question but also with some irrelevant material and weaknesses in structure
Arguments presented but lack coherence
Has several factual/computational errors
No original interpretation
Only major links between topics are described
Limited problem solving
Some weaknesses in presentation and accuracy
Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria
Strong factual knowledge with some weaknesses in understanding
Ideas/arguments are limited but are well presented
The work will be reasonably well-presented and text will be clear, but may be flawed by some grammatical errors that nevertheless do not obscure the meaning. There may be some factual errors, and shortcomings in terms of coverage of issues although the work will demonstrate sufficient knowledge of some key issues in learning and teaching. The practitioner will demonstrate knowledge of key issues associated with the ways in which students learn. They should indicate that they are able to use a range of assessment and feedback techniques and have some awareness of quality assurance issues. There should be some engagement with continuing professional development activity and evidence that work has been informed by research and scholarship although this will likely be underdeveloped. The practitioner will show that they have the ability to be reflective although this is likely to be limited and not feedback effectively into their practice. There will be evidence of engagement with elements of the Values contained within the UKPSF although this will be incomplete and there will be some deficiencies in their knowledge of the Framework.
C Mid-Level Matches all primary criteria
Moderate factual knowledge with some weaknesses in understanding
Ideas/arguments are limited with weaknesses in logic/presentation
C- Meets requirements
of class
Matches most but not all primary criteria
Moderate factual knowledge with several weaknesses in understanding
Ideas/arguments are limited with weaknesses in logic/presentation
50
D+ Compensatable fail
Good within the Class
Knowledge of key areas/principles only
Weaknesses in understanding of the subject area
Limited evidence of background study
Answer only poorly focussed on question and with some irrelevant material and poor structure
Arguments presented but lack coherence
Several factual/computational errors
No original interpretation
Only major links between topics are described
Limited problem solving
Many weaknesses in presentation and accuracy
For PGT - Insufficient to fulfil the associated learning outcomes
Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria
Moderate factual knowledge with several weaknesses in understanding
A few ideas/arguments are presented but with weaknesses
There will be some factual errors. Significant grammatical and/or structural deficiencies may mar the text, leaving the reader to have too much to do to discern the intended sense of the argument. There will be evidence that the practitioner has a basic grasp of the ways in which students learn in their discipline but with several shortcomings. They will have used some variety in techniques for assessing and feeding back to their students but this will have little originality or innovative thought. Whilst acknowledgement to quality assurance is given, it is likely to be limited. There will be limited engagement with continuing professional development and whilst research and scholarship forms part of their practice, it is mostly lacking and the arguments are personalized. There will be a superficial level of reflection evident although the practitioner will struggle to show how this has informed their practice and development. Whilst elements of the Values associated with the UKPSF are evident in their practice, the practitioner shows a limited knowledge and engagement.
D Mid-level Matches all primary criteria
Limited factual knowledge with several weaknesses in understanding
Very few ideas/arguments are presented
D- Meets requirements
of Class
Matches most but not all primary criteria
Limited factual knowledge with many weaknesses in understanding
Very few ideas/arguments are presented and with errors in logic/presentation
E Fail Borderline fail/Non-
compensatable fail
Insufficient to fulfil the associated learning outcomes
Exceeds expectations for most primary criteria
The portfolio is poorly presented and structured and there are grammatical errors. There is limited evidence that the practitioner
51
Deficiencies in knowledge even of key areas/principles
No evidence of understanding, even of main areas
No evidence of background study
Answer relies on tangential material and lacks a coherent structure
No arguments presented
Many factual/computational errors
No original interpretation
No links between topics are described
No attempt to solve problems
The presentation is very weak containing many inaccuracies
Very limited factual knowledge with many weaknesses in understanding
Weak attempt to answer/address question
understands the ways in which students learn most effectively and limited insights of how assessment and feedback should be integrated into their teaching practice. The attention to quality assurance issues will be under-developed. Engagement with continuing professional development activities will be very limited and there will be inadequate use of research and scholarship to inform their practice. The practitioner will show a limited ability to use reflective practice to inform their practice and there will be inadequate commitment to the Values contained within the UKPSF.
F Fail/non-compensatable
fail
Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria
Major gaps in knowledge/understanding
Very weak attempt to answer/address question
F (1)
Fail/non-compensatable
fail
Matches all primary criteria
Very limited evidence of knowledge/understanding
Ideas/arguments are largely irrelevant to question
The portfolio is very poorly presented with frequent errors in grammar and an illogical structure. There is little evidence of understanding the ways in which students learn and serious flaws with the ways in which assessment and feedback have been used. Quality assurance issues have been, for the most part ignored and the work makes unsupported assertions and statements. There is little engagement with continuing professional development and reflection is mostly absent. The
F (2) Poor fail (non-compensatable
Matches some primary criteria
No evidence of relevant knowledge/understanding
Ideas/arguments are irrelevant to question
52
F (3) Very poor fail (non-
compensatable
Matches very few primary criteria
No evidence to demonstrate even cursory knowledge or understanding
No attempt to answer/address question
Values contained within the UKPSF are mostly ignored.