PGCAP Handbook 2014/15

Postgraduate Certificate inPostgraduate Certificate inPostgraduate Certificate inPostgraduate Certificate in

Academic PracticeAcademic PracticeAcademic PracticeAcademic Practice

PGCAPPGCAPPGCAPPGCAP

Postgraduate Programme Handbook

Cohort 15 2014 – 2015 start

At the time of this version (12 August 2014), it is planned to submit the programme to the

HEA for accreditation in October 2014.

The PGCAP programme is “committed to improvement and innovation, and one imbued with

strong value commitments to students, their learning and the quality of teaching.” Clegg, p.4091

1 Clegg, S. (2009) ‘Forms of knowing and academic development practice’, Studies in Higher Education, 34, 4, 403–416.

Contents Part A – Programme Information ................................................................................................................................. 1

1. How to use this Handbook .................................................................................................................................... 1

2. Welcome and Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1

3. Staff Contact ......................................................................................................................................................... 2

3.1 PGCAP Team ................................................................................................................................................ 2

4. Programme Foundation ........................................................................................................................................ 3

4.1 Programme Philosophy ................................................................................................................................ 3

4.2 Programme Underpinning: Scholarship of Academic Practice ....................................................................... 3

4.2.1 Scholarship of Teaching (SoT) ................................................................................................................... 3

4.2.2 Research-teaching linkages ...................................................................................................................... 4

4.2.3 Critical Reflection ..................................................................................................................................... 4

4.3 Programme Approach & Values.................................................................................................................... 5

4.3.1 Equal Opportunities Statement ................................................................................................................ 6

4.4 PGCAP and the UK Professional Standards Framework ................................................................................. 6

5. Programme Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 7

5.1 Programme Aims ......................................................................................................................................... 7

5.2 Programme Learning Outcomes ................................................................................................................... 8

5.4 Modes of Study ............................................................................................................................................ 8

5.4.1 Programme Delivery ................................................................................................................................ 8

5.5 Approaches to Teaching & Learning ............................................................................................................. 9

5.5.1 On-campus .............................................................................................................................................. 9

5.5.2. Online ...................................................................................................................................................... 9

5.6 Assessment ................................................................................................................................................ 11

5.6.1 Assessment Overview ............................................................................................................................ 11

5.6.2 Requirements for Award ........................................................................................................................ 11

5.6.3 Submission and Presentation of Assignments ......................................................................................... 11

5.6.4 Late Assignments ................................................................................................................................... 12

5.6.5 Non-submission of Assignments ............................................................................................................. 12

5.6.6 Re-Assessment Opportunities ................................................................................................................ 12

5.6.7 Return of Assignments ........................................................................................................................... 12

5.6.8 Moderation of Assessment Policy ........................................................................................................... 12

5.6.9 Grievance Procedures ............................................................................................................................ 13

5.6.10 Ethics Committee Approval .................................................................................................................... 13

5.7 Accreditation of Prior Learning ................................................................................................................... 14

5.7.1 APL and PGCAP ...................................................................................................................................... 14

5.7.2 Application Procedures .......................................................................................................................... 15

5.8 Academic Programme Management .......................................................................................................... 16

5.8.1 Award Board .......................................................................................................................................... 16

5.8.2 Graduation ............................................................................................................................................. 16

5.8.3 Progression Board .................................................................................................................................. 16

5.8.4 Assessment Board .................................................................................................................................. 16

5.8.5 Board of Studies ..................................................................................................................................... 16

5.8.6 External Examiner 2012-2015 ................................................................................................................. 16

5.8.7 Staff Student Liaison Committee ............................................................................................................ 16

6. Programme Structure and Delivery ..................................................................................................................... 17

6.1 Year 1 - PGCAP Stage 1: Teaching and Assessing for Learning in Higher Education ...................................... 17

6.1.1 Course 1 – Research-informed Learning & Teaching Environments ......................................................... 17

6.1.2 Course 2 – Curriculum in Context: Assessment, Feedback & Curriculum Design ...................................... 18

6.2 Year 2 - PGCAP Stage 2: Foundations of Leadership in Academic Practice ................................................... 19

6.2.1 Course 3 - Scholarship of Academic Practice I ......................................................................................... 19

6.2.2 Course 4 - Scholarship of Academic Practice II ........................................................................................ 20

7. Programme Context ........................................................................................................................................... 22

7.1 Alignment of the PGCAP with University Strategy (Appendix C3 Strategic Context Programme Mapping.) .. 22

7.1.1 Strategic Plan 2013-2018, Global thinking, worldwide influence ............................................................. 22

7.1.2 Learning & Teaching Strategy ................................................................................................................. 22

7.2 Mapping of PGCAP Learning Outcomes and the UKPSF ............................................................................... 23

7.2.1 Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (FHEA) .................................................................................... 23

7.2.2 Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (SFHEA) ........................................................................ 23

7.2.3 Areas of Activity, Core Knowledge and Professional Values .................................................................... 24

7.3 Proposed Pathways to Professional Recognition ......................................................................................... 25

7.3 Quality Assurance ...................................................................................................................................... 26

Part B – University Information .................................................................................................................................. 27

B1 University Policy and Guidance ........................................................................................................................... 27

B2 Ordinances and Regulations ............................................................................................................................... 27

B3 Quick Finder Guide to Academic Support Services............................................................................................... 27

Part C – Appendices ................................................................................................................................................... 32

C1 Programme Descriptor ....................................................................................................................................... 32

C2 Course Descriptors ............................................................................................................................................. 34

C3 Strategic Context Programme Mapping .............................................................................................................. 38

C4 UKPSF and PGCAP Programme Mapping ............................................................................................................. 40

C5 Student Learning Code of Practice (on campus) .................................................................................................. 43

What staff can expect from students ...................................................................................................................... 43

What students can expect from staff ...................................................................................................................... 43

C6 Student Guide to Plagiarism ................................................................................................................................ 45

C6.1 Definition ................................................................................................................................................... 45

C6.2 Good Practice ............................................................................................................................................ 45

C6.3 Managing Plagiarism .................................................................................................................................. 48

C7 Programme Redesign References ....................................................................................................................... 49

C7.1 Sources of Redesign ................................................................................................................................... 49

C7.2 Re-design Key Processes ............................................................................................................................ 50

1

Part A – Programme Information 1. How to use this Handbook

Following an academic review at the end of 2013, the Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice (PGCAP) programme

was re-designed for the start of the academic year 2014-15. A lot of thought went into the design of the curriculum and

everything this entails, with the aim to use the PGCAP itself, and this handbook as resource, as a living example of

application of theory to practice. The ideal of ‘leading by example’ permeates not only the design of the programme and

its four courses, but also the approach to teaching (on-campus and online) and the alignment of assessment.

2. Welcome and Introduction

Welcome to the PGCAP programme at Heriot-Watt University. The programme has been run by the Centre for Academic

Leadership & Development2 (ALD) since September 2000 and we are now welcoming you into Cohort 15. All of us at ALD

and the PGCAP programme team are looking forward to working with you.

The PGCAP is a two-year part-time programme, which consists of four courses with 15 credits each on M level SCQF 11.

Completion of Year 1 (gaining 30 credits) leads to be recognised by the Higher Education Academy (HEA) and become a

Fellow of the HEA (FHEA). Successful completion of the programme (gaining 60 credits) leads to the award of PGCert. It

also allows graduates to develop a portfolio of evidence and professional dialogue, and to submit this between 1–3 years

after graduation, to be assessed for being recognised as a Senior Fellow of the HEA (SFHEA).

The UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF)3 is embedded within the programme from the beginning, and guides

participants through their studies, thus supporting the Heriot-Watt University Learning and Teaching Strategy 2013-20184,

which states that one of their Priority Areas for Development is to “align academic development activities for staff more

closely with the University’s Learning and Teaching Strategy and the UK Professional Standards Framework.”

The programme is open to Heriot-Watt University staff who support student learning (this includes Professional Services

staff with this responsibility), and who have a minimum of 10 hours of student teaching contact in an academic year.

Responsibility should also include formally or informally planning the content of teaching sessions, managing assessment

and giving feedback to students.

One of the most positive aspects of the PGCAP is that it draws together academics from across the University. This network

is so powerful because it gives you the opportunity to share expectations, experiences and conceptions of teaching and

supporting learning in higher education with people who have different disciplinary backgrounds but who are at the same

stage of their career. Our experience shows that participants learn most from these interdisciplinary conversations.

We aim to engage with you in a critically reflective dialogue of evaluating your teaching practice within your wider

professional context. In responding to the outcomes of your evaluations we hope to engender a cycle of continuous

professional development that will guide you through your academic career.

In accordance with Academic Registry’s guidance, this Programme Handbook informs you about the PGCAP, ALD, and the

University. Please familiarise yourself with the handbook and if you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact us.

We wish you an enjoyable and successful career at Heriot-Watt, and look forward to working with you on the programme.

Nicole Kipar

PGCAP Programme Leader

Centre for Academic Leadership & Development

2 Formerly 'Academic Enhancement' and before that 'Educational Development Unit' 3 n.a. (2011) UK Professional Standards Framework: for teaching and supporting learning in higher education (UKPSF). Available

at: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ukpsf (last accessed 10.07.2014) 4 Learning and Teaching Board (2013) Learning and Teaching Strategy 2013-2018, Edinburgh: Heriot-Watt University. Available

at: http://www1.hw.ac.uk/committees/ltb/lt-strategy.htm

2

3. Staff Contact

The PGCAP is delivered by the Centre for Academic Leadership & Development (ALD). The Centre aims to support and

facilitate teaching and research excellence by the entire academic community at Heriot-Watt. By continuing to deliver

innovative and inspiring leadership and development opportunities, we aim to provide practical ways to help accomplish

the University's Strategic Plan.

Beside the PGCAP, the Centre delivers University-wide development programmes - such as Heriot-Watt Crucible, Research

Futures and Heriot-Watt Engage, whilst also leading prominent national initiatives - including Scottish Crucible and the KE

Scotland Conference, and forging new collaborative activities with external research and HE institutions.

“The Centre has a pivotal role in delivering the University's Learning and Teaching Strategy through

offering development opportunities which cross the arbitrary line sometimes drawn between teaching

and research.”

Prof John Sawkins, Deputy Principal for Learning & Teaching

By continuing to deliver innovative and inspiring leadership and development opportunities, we aim to provide practical

ways to help accomplish the University's new Strategic Plan.

3.1 PGCAP Team

The dedicated PGCAP team consists of a programme leader, who also co-ordinates the courses, and an administrator.

While the core team is small, the PGCAP programme is taught by wide range of colleagues from across the university, to

share expertise and practice. The programme is supported by:

• Colleagues from the Centre of Academic Leadership & Development

• Current and former colleagues from across the University, from academic Schools and Professional services,

willing to teach seminars, to lead workshops, and through this to share their expertise

• School Learning & Teaching champions in conjunction with Directors of Learning & Teaching

• External facilitators with years of experience in tertiary education

• Approved Teachers and Markers with expertise from HEIs across the country and the HEA

• The Deans of the University in conjunction with Academic Registry

Nicole Kipar

Programme Leader PGCAP

Phone: (0131) 451 8129

Skype: nkipar

Office Location: ALD Hugh Nisbet Suite 2.07

[email protected]

� I am always happy to meet – on campus or on Skype - please contact me by

email to organise an appointment.

Nicole Kipar took up her post at Heriot-Watt University in March 2006, coming from Canterbury Christ Church

University (CCCU), where she'd worked in educational development since 2001. She studied Old English & Anglo-Saxon

studies, and obtained her postgraduate Magistra Artium (M.A.) degree from the Faculty of Arts and Humanities at the

RWTH Aachen (Aachen University of Technology, Germany) in 1995. Nicole moved from philology to pedagogy when

she joined CCCU in Kent, and has years of experience in academic leadership. She is a Fellow of the Higher Education

Academy (HEA) and a Fellow of the Staff and Educational Development Association (SEDA).

Nicole is the Programme Leader of the PGCAP, and the co-ordinator for its courses. She is particularly interested in

curriculum design and very much engaged with understanding student learning and approaches to teaching. Her

research interest focuses on transnational education and international academic development, in particular working

with Heriot-Watt University's Approved Learning Partners.

3

PGCAP admin team with Lynn Gilding as the main admin contact for the programme

and Mirren McLeod as her stand-in.

Office Location: 3.05 Postgraduate Centre

Phone: (0131) 451 8098 or 3812

Email: [email protected]

Who to contact

Programme/Course Administration Admin Team: [email protected]

Programme/Course Issues & Academic Queries Nicole Kipar: [email protected]

4. Programme Foundation

4.1 Programme Philosophy

The programme is deeply embedded in the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning5 (as described below), professionalism in

teaching and supporting learning within the HE environment as outlined by the UK Professional Standards Framework

(UKPSF) 2011, and in the active and critical engagement with educational literature and practice. At the heart of

participants’ engagement with the PGCAP lies critical reflection as a marker of the professional in Higher Education.6 The

programme is guided by the concepts of collaborative learning, as applied in the Community of Inquiry model7, and deep

learning as transformation89 which takes place through internal construction within the learner (cognitive independence),

and through dialogue with fellow participants and facilitators/teachers (social interdependence) (Garrison & Anderson10).

The programme is designed to offer choice in mode and location to make it available to all staff who support student

learning, in particular all academic staff, regardless of location and learning preference.

4.2 Programme Underpinning: Scholarship of Academic Practice

4.2.1 Scholarship of Teaching (SoT)

Heriot-Watt is a research-led institution, which values excellence in both research and learning & teaching. While

the two main areas of professional academic practice are often regarded as separate, the PGCAP programme is

instead based on the premise that they are fundamentally interconnected, and are manifestations of academic

5 See Boyer (1990) ibid., and Trigwell, K., Martin, E., Benjamin, J. & Prosser, M. (2000) ‘Scholarship of Teaching: a model’, Higher

Education Research & Development, 19:2, 155-168. 6 See Schön, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass and Moon, J. (1999) Reflection in Learning &

Professional Development: Theory & Practice, London: Kogan Page and Thompson, N. & Pascal, J.(2012) ‘Developing critically

reflective practice’, Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 13:2, 311-325.. 7 Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. Archer, W. (1999) ‘Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher

Education’, The Internet and Higher Education, 2: 2–3, 87–105. 8 Mezirow, J. and Associates. (2000) Learning as transformation. Critical perspectives on a theory in progress, San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass; Mezirow, J. (2003) ‘Transformative Learning as Discourse’, Journal of Transformative Education, 1: 58; also see

Kitchenham, A. (2008) ‘The Evolution of John Mezirow's Transformative Learning Theory’, Journal of Transformative Education,

6: 104; Entwistle, N.J. and Peterson, E.R. (2004) ‘Conceptions of learning and knowledge in higher education: Relationships with

study behaviour and influences of learning environments’, International Journal of Educational Research, 41, 407–428 and Biggs,

J. (1999) ‘What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning’, Higher Education Research & Development, 18:1, 57-75. 9 See also The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (2013) ‘Chapter B3: Learning and teaching’, in: Code of practice

for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education (Code of practice), Part B: Assuring and enhancing

academic quality, p.4. Available at: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/quality-code-B3.pdf (last accessed

20.07.2014): “Transformational learning involves a process of becoming critically aware of one's own tacit assumptions and

expectations and those of others, and assessing their relevance before making an interpretation.” 10 Garrison, D.R. & Anderson, T. (2003) E-learning in the 21st Century: A Framework for Research and Practice, New York:

Routledge.

4

identity. This understanding is expressed in how Ernest Boyer’s11 (1990) model of scholarship was chosen to establish

the programme in. The theoretical framework of the PGCAP is a critical interpretation of this understanding of

scholarship with its four – overlapping - domains of discovery, integration, application, and teaching, summarised in

his concept of Scholarship of Teaching (SoT), which authors have since articulated as the Scholarship of Teaching &

Learning (SoTL).

The programme recognises Academic Practice as integrating these domains of scholarship. While these domains

might appear at first glance as distinct activities, authors like Boshier12 (2009) believe that Boyer would not have

wanted his concept disaggregated in this way. Trigwell and Shale13 (2004) reminded us that “all higher educators,

Boyer implied, share a commitment to knowledge creation: teaching and research alike are equally important

aspects of it.”

4.2.2 Research-teaching linkages

The University’s Vision14 at the centre of the Learning & Teaching Strategy is:

To deliver world-leading research-informed education and to be recognised globally for the high quality

of our graduates.

The PGCAP does not consider teaching and supporting student learning as a distinct area of academic practice, but

integrated in the role of the academic, and as an interconnected and joined part of academic practice. The

programme understands scholarship of teaching as embedding all of Boyer’s overlapping dimensions, and therefore

teaching as the context and setting for discovery, integration and application15. This means that incorporating

research-informed teaching can be seen as the application of scholarship to theoretical or practical issues - which in

return inform teaching. In Fincher and Work’s16 (2006) words, “teaching can [should] include the scholarship of

application, integration, and research.”

Furthermore, Healey17 (2000) argued that the scholarship of teaching needs to be developed within the context of

the culture of the disciplines in which it is applied, and that “the scholarship of teaching involves engagement with

research into teaching and learning, critical reflection of practice, and communication and dissemination about the

practice of one’ s subject.”

For the purpose of the PGCAP programme, the integrated model of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (SoTL),

as described above, is understood and referred to as the Scholarship of Academic Practice (SoAP)

4.2.3 Critical Reflection

The term reflection could be considered as a representation of human consciousness. Reflection as

process or act refers to the means by which the human mind has knowing of itself and its thinking.

Such a process is deeply embedded in the continuous relationship between action and reflection. In

this sense one can conceptualise reflection as the action of turning (back) or fixing the thoughts on

some subject, in order to learn. (Higgins, 2011, p.58318)

11 Boyer, E. (1990) Scholarship reconsidered: priorities of the professoriate, New Jersey: The Carnegie Foundation for the

Advancement of Teaching 12 Boshier, R. (2009) ‘Why is the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning such a hard sell?’, Higher Education Research &

Development, 28:1, 1-15 13 Trigwell, K. & Shale, S. (2004) ‘Student learning and the scholarship of university teaching’, Studies in Higher Education, 29:4,

523-536. 14 See also section 7.1 ‘Alignment of the PGCAP with University Strategy’ 15 Boshier (2009), ibid. 16 Fincher, R.-M. & Work, J. (2006) ‘Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching’, Medical Education, 40: 293–295 17 Healey, M. (2000) Developing the Scholarship of Teaching in Higher Education: A discipline-based approach, Higher Education

Research & Development, 19:2, 169-189 18 Higgins, D. (2011) ‘Why reflect? Recognising the link between learning and reflection’, Reflective Practice: International and

Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 12:5, 583-584.

5

Over one-hundred years ago, the key originator of the concept of reflection, the psychologist and educational

reformer John Dewey19 “concluded that reflection is an active and intentional cognitive process involving sequences

of interconnected ideas that interact with underlying beliefs and knowledge.” (quoted in Thorson & DeVore, 2013,

p.9020). Since then, many frameworks and varieties of interpretations of the concept of reflection have been.

For the purpose of the PGCAP programme, Hatton & Smith’s21 (1995) understanding that “reflective thinking

generally addresses practical problems and often requires a time of disequilibrium and reframing beliefs and actions

before solutions are reached” is fitting. And as Rodgers (2002, p.84522) emphasised, reflection is a “complex,

rigorous, intellectual, and emotional enterprise that takes time to do well.”

Shaw (2013, p.32023) illuminated the connection between reflection and learning by stating that “Deep reflexivity

can lead to perspective transformation (Mezirow, 200024) or transformative learning (Habermas, 197425; Moon,

200426).”

The PGCAP refers to critical reflection throughout the programme, and this concept will be explored from Course 1

onwards. Reflection is an integral part of being a professional in Higher Education, in that it allows us to stand back

and analyse our experience, and critical reflection encourages us to look beyond and seek answers to such complex

questions (Larrivee, 2008, p.34227) as to the nature of our frame of reference, our beliefs, and how these beliefs and

frameworks condition our practice.

The PGCAP aims for participants to create their own meaning of reflective practice, and engage with it in a

constructively critical way.

Critical reflective knowing is neither behavioural nor technical, not truth establishing

nor captured by a discipline. It critiques all other forms of knowledge, and in so doing, it

moves beyond merely reproducing what is. (Habermas, 1978, p.4228)

4.3 Programme Approach & Values

The PGCAP curriculum was designed in a melded approach (Toohey, 199929), taking into consideration four main drivers:

Schools, University, Professional bodies (HEA), Government (QAA, SCQF). Drivers can be conflicting, and working with a

one-dimensional, inflexible model was considered unsuitable, instead requiring an approach that allows the combining of

agendas, constraints, ideologies and resources. The two main models in this melded approach are Toohey’s Experiential

(or personal relevance) approach, and the Socially Critical approach.

19 Dewey, J. (1933) How We Think. A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process (Revised edn.),

Boston: D. C. Heath. 20 Thorsen, C.A. & DeVore, S. (2013) ‘Analyzing reflection on/for action: A new approach’, Reflective Practice: International and

Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 14:1, 88-103. 21 Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995) ‘Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation’, Teaching & Teacher

Education, 11(1), 33–49. 22 Rodgers, C. (2002) ‘Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking’, Teachers College Record, 104(4),

842 –866. 23 Shaw, R. (2013) ‘A model of the transformative journey into reflexivity: an exploration into students’ experiences of critical

reflection’, Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 14:3, 319-335. 24 Mezirow, J. and Associates (2000) Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress, San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass. 25 Habermas, J. (1974) Theory and practice, London: Heinemann. 26 Moon, J. (2004) A handbook of reflective and experiential learning, Abingdon: Routledge. 27 Larrivee, B. (2008) ‘Development of a Tool to Assess Teachers’ Level of Reflective Practice,’ Reflective Practice: International

and Multidisciplinary Perspective, 9 (3): 341-360. 28 Habermas, J. (1978) Knowledge and Human Interests (2nd ed), London: Heinemann. 29 Toohey, S. (1999) ‘Beliefs, values and ideologies in course design’, in: Designing courses for higher education, Susan Toohey,

Buckingham: SRHE and OUP, pp. 44-69.

6

Experiential Socially Critical

View of knowledge:

Knowledge is most valued that is personally significant and

useful

PGCAP: embedded in participants’ own academic practice

View of knowledge:

Knowledge is constructed within our historical and cultural

frameworks

PGCAP: embedded in scholarship (SoAP) and HE context

Process of learning:

Climate of respect between learners & teachers

Collaboration and support amongst learners

Authenticity and openness of the teachers

Process of learning:

Dialogue between learners and teachers

Critique of social concepts and institutions

PGCAP: transnational education and global learning

Roles of learners & teachers:

Teacher: assists learners in self-regulating their learning by

facilitating seminars, collaboration; providing guidance,

access to resources

Learners: plan their learning needs, identify strategies

Roles of learners & teachers:

Teacher: assists learners in understanding where their own

views come from, challenges preconceptions, encourages

other possibilities

Learners: critically evaluate, come to their own conclusions

Learning goals:

Involves learners in the formulation of their learning goals

PGCAP: individual focus based on needs analysis (Year 1)

and interest (Year 2)

Learning goals:

Learners become graduates who are capable of self-

realisation in a social context

PGCAP: focus on reflection throughout programme

Assessment:

Learners collaborate with peers and colleagues (Year 1)

Learners evaluate a complex project (Year 2 synoptic)

Assessment:

Learners collaborate with peers and colleagues (Year 1)

Critical inquiry & independent judgment (Year 2 synoptic)

TABLE 1 COMPARISON OF EXPERIENTIAL AND SOCIALLY CRITICAL MODELS ACCORDING TO TOOHEY, PP. 59-66

4.3.1 Equal Opportunities Statement

The PGCAP programme is founded on the understanding that equality of opportunity30 is key to academic

development, and this belief permeates everything the programme stands for and aims to achieve. The PGCAP

cherishes the diversity among staff and students of the University and the opportunities this brings, and it aims to

enable all students/staff to realise their full potential.

The programme aims to create an environment in which all students and staff are selected and treated solely on the

basis of their merits, abilities and potential, regardless of sex, colour, ethnic or national origin, race, disability, age,

sexual orientation, socio-economic background, religion and belief (including lack of belief) or political beliefs, trade

union membership or non-membership, marital and civil partnership status, family circumstances, pregnancy or

maternity status, gender reassignment.

The PGCAP is in line with Heriot-Watt University’s Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) which “acknowledges that

equality is not about 'treating everyone the same' as everyone is different. EIA is a way of recognising this should be

reflected in the way that we work.”31

4.4 PGCAP and the UK Professional Standards Framework

The Heriot-Watt University Learning and Teaching Strategy 2013-2018 states under its third strategic objective ‘Staff

Development’ that to achieve the key aim “to promote across the University an environment which values and supports

staff in the continuous enhancement of learning and teaching” one of the Priority Areas for Development is to :

Align academic development activities for staff more closely with the University’s Learning and Teaching

Strategy and the UK Professional Standards Framework

The PGCAP programme has been designed to align with University strategy, and this approach is detailed in section 7.1

‘Alignment of the PGCAP with University Strategy’ and Appendix C3.

30 See HWU Equal Opportunities statement: http://www1.hw.ac.uk/hr/eo_index.php 31 Equality & Diversity at Heriot-Watt University: http://www1.hw.ac.uk/equality/index.htm

7

The UKPSF is embedded within

the programme from the

beginning, and guides

participants through their

studies, especially in Year 1.

For example, before the start

of Course 1 ‘Research-

informed Learning & Teaching

Environments’ participants are

asked to fill in a spider diagram

of the Areas of Activity, Core

Knowledge and Professional

values of the UKPSF to focus

their development priorities

throughout the first year of the

programme.

Alignment is detailed in Section

7.2 ‘Mapping of PGCAP

Learning Outcomes with the

UKPSF’ and Appendix.

5. Programme Overview The programme is designed on postgraduate masters level 1132 of the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework

(SCQF33) for part-time study, with a notional number of study hours of 150 per course. The majority of these hours will be

comprised of participants’ own teaching practice: their teaching and support of student learning are integral parts to the

programme.

5.1 Programme Aims The PGCAP programme aims to establish participants’ concepts of learning, and thus of their academic practice, within

the integrated dimensions of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (SoTL) which is understood and referred to as the

Scholarship of Academic Practice (SoAP), and to provide pathways to professional accreditation by the Higher Education

Academy through engagement with the UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF) in accordance with University

strategy.

It aims to provide participants with the confidence to:

• plan and choose appropriate strategies from a diversity of teaching approaches - including technology

• determine when and how innovation is beneficial to promote high quality learning

• support learning in different modes (locations, levels, roles) through the adoption of key policies and a theory

and practice-informed attitude to teaching and learning

• know where their strengths and weaknesses are while challenging themselves.

The programme further aims for participants to establish their own academic identity and practice (specifically in Learning

& Teaching) as a 21st century Academic within the global reach of Heriot-Watt University and the context of Scottish

Higher Education.

32 The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education Scotland (2014) ‘Master's degrees’, in: The framework for qualifications

of higher education institutions in Scotland, p.16. Available at: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/FQHEIS-June-

2014.pdf (last accessed 20.07.2014) 33 SCQF (2012) SCQF Level Descriptors, Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework. Available at: http://scqf.org.uk/wp-

content/uploads/2014/03/SCQF-Revised-Level-Descriptors-Aug-2012-FINAL-web-version1.pdf (last accessed 17.07.2014)

A1 Design & plan

learning activitiesA2 Teach and/or

support learning

A3 Assess & give

feedback to learners

A4 Develop effective

learning environments

A5 Engage in continuing

professional…

K1 The subject material

K2 Methods for

teaching, learning,…

K3 How students learnK4 Use & value of

learning technologies

K5 Methods for

evaluating teaching

K6 Implications of

quality assurance &…

V1 Respect individual

learners & diverse…

V2 Promote

participation in higher…

V3 Use evidence-

informed approaches…

V4 Acknowledge the

wider context of HE

FIGURE 1 SPIDER SWOT DIAGRAM EMBEDDING UKPSF IN LEARNER FOCUS

8

5.2 Programme Learning Outcomes

Understanding, Knowledge and Cognitive Skills

• Plan teaching approaches appropriate to the disciplinary context, mode, location, and level of learning, and

choose confidently from a variety of suitable teaching methods.

• Demonstrate critical engagement with principles of curriculum design, and their application on course and

programme level, both conceptually and within discipline contexts.

• Relate contrasting assessment goals and functions to their role in educational design and how they affect

student learning.

Scholarship, Enquiry and Research

• Integrate research in learning and teaching, and determine the most relevant approach to research informed

teaching from the research-teaching nexus.

• Evidence adoption of scholarship: integration of research and professional activities in their teaching and

support of student learning.

• Evaluate their learning and teaching practice by choosing appropriate methods and methodologies.

• Integrate critical engagement with education literature and practice, and implement pedagogical knowledge

to educational design in their discipline.

Industrial, Commercial and Professional Practice

• Identify and develop their academic identity and situate their academic practice within the global

environment of the institution, Scottish Higher Education, and external bodies.

• Evidence the adoption of a critically reflective approach to their academic practice and their own professional

values in relation to learning, teaching and research.

• Implement the professional values, core knowledge and areas of activity of the UK Professional Standards

Framework as a commitment to continuing professional development and evaluation of their practice.

Autonomy, Accountability and Working with Others

• Adopt an inclusive attitude to equality and diversity34, apply principles of interculturality and operate

proactively within transnational education.

• Apply effective strategies to mentoring students, and supervision of student projects and research.

Communication, Numeracy and ICT

• Evaluate the relevance of technology and employ appropriate technologies to improve the student learning

environment and experience, and appraise the potential benefits of changing pedagogic practice.

• Engage in professional dialogue with peers through effective communication and by giving constructive,

useful feedback.

5.4 Modes of Study

5.4.1 Programme Delivery

The PGCAP programme combines Edinburgh campus and International campuses participants (and online-learning

participants) in one cohort. With face-to-face block teaching and seminars throughout the semester on the

Edinburgh campus, planned block teaching on the International campuses, and online seminars throughout the

semester, there is great flexibility in how participants may engage in their studies and collaborate with their peers.

34 See also: The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (2013) ‘Chapter B1: Programme design, development and

approval: Promoting equality’, in: Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education (Code

of practice), Part B: Assuring and enhancing academic quality, pp.4-5. Available at:

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/quality-code-B1.pdf (last accessed 20.07.2014) and Ibid. ‘Chapter B3:

Learning and teaching’, pp.10-11.

9

We will make extensive use of VISION, the University’s Virtual Learning Environment (VLE), and will use Skype (or

other appropriate synchronous online collaboration tool) and its group call facility with the ability to share screen,

conducting online seminars. You must have Skype installed on your computer (or other appropriate synchronous

online collaboration tool, as directed), and have a working webcam and microphone/speakers.

5.5 Approaches to Teaching & Learning The PGCAP programme is designed to offer choice in mode and location to make it available to all staff who support

student learning, in particular all academic staff, regardless of location and learning preference. The key principle to

safeguard academic standards across multi-mode/location provision is, according to the Code of Practice for the

Management of Multi-Location, Multi-Mode Programmes (2014)35:

“Identical Academic Standards; Diversity of Learning Experiences”

Alongside the university’s code of practice, the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA)’s statement36 lies

at the heart of the programme’s teaching approach, which is designed to ensure equal quality of learning:

The nature of students' particular learning experiences may vary according to location of study, mode of

study, or academic subject, as well as whether they have any protected characteristics, but every

student experiences parity in the quality of learning opportunities.

5.5.1 On-campus

The face-to-face division of the programme includes seminars and workshops on the Edinburgh campus over the

course of the semester, and - where possible - block-taught sessions on international and other Scottish campuses.

5.5.2. Online

The online division of the programme is delivered through the university’s Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) VISION

and uses additional technologies when suitable. The online learning design is based on the Community of Inquiry

framework (Garrison & Anderson37) and its three major components of Cognitive-, Social- and Teaching presence.

Practical Inquiry, the process embedded in Cognitive presence, considers both the psychological and sociological

sides of the educational process identified by Dewey38 as early as 1897.

The online learning design is based on the Community of Inquiry framework (Garrison & Anderson, 200339) and its

process of Practical Inquiry, with the concept of transactional dialogue40 (Moore, 198341, 199342) at its heart. As

Garrison and Anderson (ibid., p.23) described it:

A critical community of learners, from an educational perspective, is composed of teachers and students

transacting with the specific purposes of facilitating, constructing, and validating understanding, and of

35 Heriot-Watt University (2014) Code of Practice for the Management of Multi-Location, Multi-Mode Programmes, Edinburgh:

HWU. Available at: http://www1.hw.ac.uk/quality/cop-multi-location.htm (last accessed 16.07.2014) 36 The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (2013) ‘Chapter B3: Learning and teaching’, in: Code of practice for the

assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education (Code of practice), Part B: Assuring and enhancing academic

quality, p.10. 37 Garrison, D.R. & Anderson, T. (2003) E-learning in the 21st Century: A Framework for Research and Practice, New York:

Routledge. 38 Dewey, J. (1897) ‘My Pedagogic Creed’, The School Journal, Vol LIV, No 3, pp. 77-80 39 See footnote above: Garrison, D.R. & Anderson, T. (2003) E-learning in the 21st Century: A Framework for Research and

Practice, New York: Routledge 40 In addition to Moore’s original work, the importance of diminishing transactional distance through dialogue in online learning

does not only consider learner - teacher relations, but learner - learner (peer) relations. 41 Moore, M.G. (1983) ‘The individual adult learner’, in M. Tight (Ed.) Education for Adults, Volume 1: Adult Learning and

Education, London: Croom Helm, pp. 153-168. 42 Moore, M. G. (1993) ‘Theory of transactional distance’, in D. Keegan (Ed.) Theoretical Principles of Distance Education, Vol 1,

New York: Routledge, pp.22-38.

10

developing capabilities that will lead to further learning. Such a community encourages cognitive

independence and social interdependence simultaneously.

The three major components of the Community of Inquiry model are:

• Cognitive presence is the extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained

reflection and discourse (Garrison et al, 200143).

• Social presence is the “ability of participants to identify with the community (e.g., course of study), communicate

purposefully in a trusting environment, and develop inter-personal relationships by way of projecting their

individual personalities.” (Swan et al, 200944)

• Teaching presence is defined as the “design, facilitation, and direction of cognitive and social processes for the

purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educational worthwhile learning outcomes.” (Anderson et al,

200145).

Cognitive Presence: Practical Inquiry

Garrison, Anderson and Archer reflected on in 201046 (p.6):

Cognitive presence is operationalized through the Practical Inquiry (PI) model based on the

more elaborate phases of Dewey's notion of reflective thought. Dewey believed that a

worthwhile educational experience should be based on a process of reflective inquiry.

They also reiterated that while it appeared as if cognitive presence was of greater importance, they did not actually

believe this to be correct. However, in online learning there is the danger of lack of social/emotional presence and

facilitation factors, and as Lipman stated in 200347 (p.25) “In reality, the reflective model is thoroughly social and

communal.”

43 Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001) ‘Critical thinking, cognitive presence and computer conferencing in distance

education’, American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23. 44 Swan, K., Garrison, D. R. & Richardson, J. C. (2009) ‘A constructivist approach to online learning: the Community of Inquiry

framework’, in Payne, C. R. (Ed.) Information Technology and Constructivism in Higher Education: Progressive Learning

Frameworks. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 43-57. 45 Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R. & Archer, W. (2001) ‘Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context’,

Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1-17. 46 Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2010) ‘The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective’,

Internet and Higher Education 13, 5–9. 47 Lipman, M. (2003) Thinking in Education, 2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cognitive presence: practical inquiry

1. construct and confirm meaning through sustained

reflection and discourse

Social Presence

1. affective expression: learners share personal

expressions of emotion, feelings, beliefs, and values

2. open communication: learners build and sustain a

sense of group commitment

3. group cohesion: learners interact around common

intellectual activities and tasks

Teaching presence:

1. design and organization

2. facilitating discourse

3. direct instruction

FIGURE 2 COMMUNITY OF INQUIRY MODEL

11

5.6 Assessment

The assessment regulations follow those for other Postgraduate courses in the University, except for one adjustment to

the Common Assessment and Progression System: as is common in courses for academic staff, grading is on a pass / refer

basis.

Assessment involves a series of coursework assignments, which relate to the learning outcomes of the programme, the

learning outcomes of the course being assessed, and the UKPSF areas. All assignments should be embedded in the

participants’ own, subject specific practice in teaching, learning and research.

5.6.1 Assessment Overview

Course Assignment Requirement

YEAR 1 SEMESTER 1

Course 1

Individual: Critical Reflection on SoAP (integrated SoTL) applied to

own academic practice Pass/Refer

Part 1 of structured peer observation: planning on session level

YEAR 1 SEMESTER 2

Course 2

Collaborative (e.g. interdisciplinary, multi-location): Learning Design

Project on any aspect of the curriculum Pass/Refer

Part 2 of structured peer observation, planning on course level

(aligned curriculum)

YEAR 2

Course 3 & Course 4

Synoptic Assessment:

Enquiry into academic practice: Evaluation Study / Practitioner

Research

Pass/Refer

5.6.2 Requirements for Award

All assessed work must be credited with a pass in order to pass the programme and achieve the Award (PGCert).

Assessment will be based on an ungraded pass/refer system. All parts of the course assessment will be a requirement

for the award (e.g. formative assessment in synoptic Course 3). You will qualify for the award of Postgraduate

Certificate in Academic Practice if you pass all four courses. The Certificate fits the University (and national) award

structure of 60 credits on SCQF level 11 (Masters level), with 15 credit points attributed to each course.

5.6.3 Submission and Presentation of Assignments

All assignments are to be submitted electronically, ideally in Word format, or in RTF. Assignments are to be submitted

electronically through VISION before 4.00pm on the due date. You will be asked to submit via TurnitIn.

Assignments must have the course specific assignment information on the first page, including as a minimum:

• Participant name

• Course for which the assignment is submitted

• Number and assignation of the assignment (e.g. 1.1 Critical Reflection)

• Title of the assignment (e.g. Reflections on online facilitation)

12

The referencing style should be the Harvard System of Citing & Referencing. It is expected that assignments will

adhere strictly to style conventions. The University Library provides essential information and guidance:

• http://isguides.hw.ac.uk/home

• http://isguides.hw.ac.uk/ae

• http://www.hw.ac.uk/is/docs/Harvardguide.pdf

5.6.4 Late Assignments

You are expected to submit assignments by the specified date. In exceptional circumstances extension may be

granted by the course co-ordinator, and you should contact them in the first instance.

If you are granted an extension, the absolute submission deadline for any given academic year is the 31st of August

of that year. For example, if an extension request for course 2 (taught in semester 2) was granted in May 2014, then

the final deadline for submitting is the 31st of August 2014. The same is true for any course taught in semester 1.

Submissions for an academic year cannot be accepted beyond the 31st of August of that year.

For any questions regarding assessment policy, contact the programme leader Nicole Kipar ([email protected]).

To gain an extension, you need to complete a Late Assignment Request form available from the PGCAP team and on

VISION before the due date.

5.6.5 Non-submission of Assignments

Failure to submit assignments will be handled as a referral.

5.6.6 Re-Assessment Opportunities

If the Board of Examiners decide that a candidate be referred in any course, then the candidate should normally be

given the opportunity to retake that course. The Board of Examiners may give specific directions on the nature of

the work to be resubmitted. The course does not necessarily have to be retaken with attendance. The procedures

for appeal are contained in Regulation 36.

A second referral may be allowed at the discretion of the Board of Studies.

5.6.7 Return of Assignments

Course markers are committed to providing feedback on your assignments as immediately as is possible. In most

instances, this will occur within three weeks.

5.6.8 Moderation of Assessment Policy

The Centre for Academic Leadership & Development (ALD) is affiliated with the School of Management and

Languages (SML) as an Approved Service Unit (ASU) and all academic processes of the PGCAP run through SML. ALD

therefore adopts the SML Moderation of Assessment Policy, and the following has been taken from the SML Learning

& Teaching handbook, and modified according to the requirements of the PGCAP programme.

Internal moderation of marks

All marking must be moderate. Moderation is defined here as the reviewing of a sample of scripts that have been

marked by another member of staff. The purpose of moderation is to check for fairness, consistency and equivalence

of standards between courses, campuses and delivery modes. Written assessment, in the case of the PGCAP

programme, refers to written coursework. The following policy applies as a minimum standard.

• For assessment cohorts of up to 250, moderators should review 25 per cent or 20 scripts, whichever is

fewest.

Moderation should include:

• The whole examination or coursework assignment (not specific questions);

• A representative spectrum of marks;

• All borderlines and a sample of refers; and

13

• Any scripts identified as likely to be the subject of discussion at a final examiners' meeting

Scripts should be submitted for moderation in good time with regards to coursework feedback deadlines and/or

examination boards.

External moderation of marks

It is the responsibility of the course leaders in conjunction with the programme leader to ensure that appropriate

external moderation of candidates’ work occurs. S/he will keep a record of all work which has been externally

moderated.

It is a fundamental principle of moderation that External Examiners must be able to scrutinise examples of assessed

work by all candidates in all activities, should they wish to do so. In view of the heavy load on Externals, and the

desirability of ensuring that moderation is as effective as possible, the following procedures should be followed.

Written activities – coursework

A sample of scripts should be presented for scrutiny by the External in the first instance. Submission to the external

examiner should include:

• A representative range of marks awarded

• A minimum of five and a maximum of ten scripts where possible

• All borderlines and fails

• A full mark list (including class breakdown)

• A copy of the question(s) set; marking criteria as appropriate.

Scripts submitted by all candidates not included in the sample should be retained for scrutiny on request.

The PGCAP programme team aims for a least 50% moderation, rather than 25%.

5.6.9 Grievance Procedures

Any grievance related to the course should normally be addressed with the Programme Leader, Nicole Kipar. Where

this is either inappropriate or not possible, students should contact the Head of School of Management and

Languages, (the PGCAP programme reports through SML).

5.6.10 Ethics Committee Approval

All participants undertaking Year 2 of the PGCAP must complete the On-line Research Ethics Approval Form for staff

from the School of Management and Languages (SML). http://www.sml.hw.ac.uk/forms/ethics/staff.html The

Centre for Academic Leadership & Development is affiliated with SML as an Approved Service Unit (ASU) and all

academic processes of the PGCAP run through SML.

You must fill in the form whether you are collecting primary data (e.g. interviews and questionnaires - staff and/or

students) or re-examining existing datasets, literature or documents. Gaining Ethics Approval is not an overly onerous

task and in most cases may take as little as 10-20 minutes of your time. You cannot begin fieldwork until your

application has been approved - approval will come via email.

You must make sure that all of your study participants sign and agree with the consent form (guidelines to be found

in the PGCAP Ethics Approval folder in VISION), are aware of their rights to withdraw, and informed of the use of the

data. It is highly recommended that you should state in the form that the data "will be used for an assignment but

may also be used for academic publication." This is to pre-empt the potential for using your assignment as a basis

for an evaluation study or research article for one of the education-focused journals. If you intend (or decide at a

later date) to use any of the data for publication you must have said so in the consent form.

In the unlikely event that your research involves "vulnerable groups" (e.g. children aged 15 years or under, disabled,

the aged, ethnic minorities) you must see the information below on Disclosure Scotland. This is not applicable, for

example, if your research sample just so happens to include random individuals who are of an ethnic minority, are

disabled or aged.

14

The Ethics Approval folder is situated in the Assessment Information area of your appropriate VISION courses and

contains all necessary links, guidelines, information and forms:

• Link to On-line Ethics Committee Approval Form (staff)

• Advice on filling in the On-line Ethics Committee Approval Form for the PGCAP

• Information Sheet / Consent Form

• Consent form for vulnerable groups

• Disclosure Scotland and research ethics advice

• Link to Disclosure Scotland application

Any questions about research ethics that cannot be answered by your Course Leader or PGCAP Programme Leader

can be directed to James Richards ([email protected]) - Chair of the School's Ethics Committee.

You must attach the receipt of your Ethics Approval agreement to your assignment when submitting.

5.7 Accreditation of Prior Learning If substantial areas of the programme have been covered prior to entry, there is provision for Accreditation of Prior

Learning (APL) exemption, as described in Regulation 4648. The process of identification, assessment and formal

acknowledgement of prior learning and achievement is commonly known as 'accreditation'. The Quality Assurance

Agency’s guidelines49 explain how learning that has taken place in a range of contexts may be assessed and formally

recognised through accreditation.

Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL) involves the recognition for award-bearing purposes of previous learning, either

formally (e.g. on accredited programmes – Accreditation of Prior Certificated Learning: APCL) or informally (e.g. through

experience or independent study – Accreditation of Experiential Learning: APEL).

Credit accumulation and transfer schemes (CATS) are nationally recognised systems which provide opportunities for

students to transfer between institutions or accumulate academic credit towards a qualification at their own pace. Each

qualification is assigned a credit value. In the Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice (PGCAP) all 4 courses have

been assigned a credit value of 15 units at M Level (SCQF 11). The certificate is therefore worth 60 credits.

5.7.1 APL and PGCAP

The Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice currently allows for the Accreditation of Prior Certificated

Learning, and the Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning.

According to university regulations50, participants who apply for APL will need to supply evidence, in the form of a

reflective account, that the learning outcomes of the course they wish to claim APL for, have been achieved on a

former course which has been assessed and/or accredited at higher education level (accredited prior learning), or

through experience (experiential prior learning). This reflective account is assessed by the Programme Leader in

conjunction with the Course Team. It is then passed to the PGCAP Programme Leader to be signed, who will send it

to the Director of Learning & Teaching of the School of Management and Languages (through which the PGCAP

academic processes are run) for approval and signature. Finally, the AP(E)L application goes through the

Postgraduate Studies Committee (PSC).

The maximum credit for Accreditation of Prior Learning will be the equivalent of 2 courses, which is 50% of the

Programme. The currency of the Prior Learning will be within the last 5 years.

48 Heriot-Watt University (2014) Regulation 46 (Accreditation of Prior Learning) Available at:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/ordinances/regulations.pdf (last accessed 16.07.2014) 49 Quality Assurance Agency (2004) Guidelines on the Accreditation of Prior Learning. Available at:

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Accreditation-Prior-Learning-guidelines.pdf (last accessed 16.07.2014) 50 Heriot-Watt University (2003, updated 2008) APL Guidance Notes Available at:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/aplguidancenotes.pdf (last accessed 16.07.2014)

15

5.7.2 Application Procedures

The procedure for applying for exemptions from PGCAP is:

Stage 1

Look at the learning outcomes for the course concerned. If you are convinced that you have achieved these outcomes

– and that you can evidence this achievement – speak to the Course Co-ordinator.

Stage 2

Complete the APL application form, indicating for which course you are requesting exemption. Attach a statement

which provides clear evidence of how you have achieved the learning outcomes for the course.

For accredited APCL this evidence will be a transcript, programme structure and course descriptor. However, you

must make sure to include a breakdown of what was covered (syllabus), description of assignments, topics, etc., to

ensure clarity that the learning outcomes of the appropriate PGCAP course have been met and were at the equivalent

level (SCQF 11).

For APEL this may involve a portfolio or a substantial piece of writing, giving sufficient detail for assessment of

whether or not the learning outcomes have been achieved. Please note that the process assesses outcomes, not

output. – See the QAA Guidelines on this.)

Stage 3

Submit the following to the PGCAP Admin Team (Email [email protected]):

• completed PGCAP APL application form

• summary of the activities and experiences which form the basis of your claim and are the evidence of the

achievement of the learning outcomes

• Make sure to include the learning outcomes of the course for which you are claiming exemption, so that the

assessor can make a judgement on how your prior learning maps against those.

• Name and position of two referees who could be called upon to substantiate the claim.

Notes on Evidence in claims of Experiential Learning (APEL)

You must provide an analysis of how the learning outcomes of the course have been met by your previous

experience. This is likely to be a substantial piece of writing with sufficient detail to demonstrate your

achievements. For example, “I have been a lecturer for two years” would first need to be set in context, and give

background detail of where, who, what and when you taught, for how long, and what your levels of responsibility

were. You would then explain how, during that lecturing period, you fulfilled the learning outcomes for a specific

PGCAP course, which is not a description, but an analysis of successful engagement i.e. a positive impact on

student learning. This would be accompanied by evidence (e.g. student feedback, external examiner comments,

indicators of student achievement, educational literature review, development of new teaching approaches, or

self-reflection). Since all PGCAP courses are embedded in the scholarship of academic practice (see programme

handbook for clarification), and informed by educational research, your experiential learning should be

accompanied by reflection on how your practice was informed by (specific) theory or theories and thus how you

applied educational theory to practice. Appropriate referencing should be used.

Submissions will be passed to the Programme Leader.

Stage 4

The application will be assessed by the Course Team and the PGCAP Programme Leader, who then passes it to

the DLT of the School of Management and Languages for approval. In terms of Regulation 46, paragraph 8.3.1 the

Dean has agreed that the School DLT may make the decision which should be reported to the Chair of PSC when

the Dean is satisfied that appropriate judgments have been made.

16

Stage 4

You will be notified of the recommended outcome by the PGCAP Team. The transcript for your Postgraduate

Certificate award will indicate that credits have been awarded on the basis of APL.

5.8 Academic Programme Management The PGCAP programme follows the same academic processes as any other university accredited programme.

5.8.1 Award Board

The PGCAP Award Board takes place in the autumn diet, and there will only be one Award Board per academic year.

This change was requested by the Senior Dean of the university, then discussed at the PGCAP Board of Studies, and

aligns the PGCAP processes with the University's postgraduate processes.

5.8.2 Graduation

Graduation will take place in the autumn diet on all campuses. This puts colleagues on the Dubai campus into the

same graduation time as the Edinburgh campus.

5.8.3 Progression Board

Progression Boards take place once each semester, in the spring and the autumn diet.

5.8.4 Assessment Board

Assessment Boards take place once each semester, in the spring and the autumn diet.

5.8.5 Board of Studies

The Centre for Academic Leadership & Development is an Approved Service Unit (ASU), as defined in Ordinance 36,

which states that for each course of study offered by an ASU, there shall be established a Board of Studies.

The Board of Studies meets annually to discuss matters relating to the course and monitor the admission and

progress of candidates. Its membership (Ordinance 36) is as follows:

(a) the Chair, who shall be appointed by the Senate on the recommendation of the Senate Business

Committee, and shall normally be the senior Approved Teacher of the ASU

(b) the Head of the ASU

(c) the Dean of the University who represents the subject disciplines to which the ASU has been

allocated, namely either (1) Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences or (2) Science and Engineering

(d) the Approved Teachers of the ASU

(e) the Heads of Schools contributing to the course of study or their nominees

(f) the members of the academic staff contributing to the course of study.

(g) such other approved teachers as the Senate may from time to time determine.

5.8.6 External Examiner 2012-2015

The external examiner for the programme is Dr Martyn Kingsbury, Head of the Educational Development Unit,

Imperial College London: http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/edudev/

5.8.7 Staff Student Liaison Committee

This is a forum for notification and discussion of programme issues, and provides valuable feedback to the Board of

Studies. It is composed of programme tutors and two student representatives for each year of the programme, who

are elected by the class early in the first semester.

The committee usually meets each semester. Details of the discussion at the Committee are circulated. However any

informal feedback to the course leaders and programme leader are welcome at any time. The ethos of the

programme is on reflection upon experience. There is the expectation that you will engage in dialogue during the

session in order to deepen understanding about learning and teaching. Feedback, then, is integral to this programme.

17

6. Programme Structure and Delivery

Year 1

PGCAP Stage 1: Teaching and Assessing for Learning in Higher Education

Proposed Recognition route: Successful completion of Course 1 & Course 2 (30 credits) - Fellow of the HEA

Year 1

Year 2

Year 2

PGCAP Stage 2: Foundations of Leadership in Academic Practice

Proposed Recognition route: Successful completion of PGCAP (60 credits) followed by

portfolio supported dialogue within 1-3 years - Senior Fellow of the HEA

6.1 Year 1 - PGCAP Stage 1: Teaching and Assessing for Learning in Higher Education

Year 1 Curriculum

• Foundations of academic practice: understanding learning, approaches to teaching, assessing, and supporting

learning in context

• Integrating research-teaching linkages, and introduction to Scholarship of Academic Practice

• Academic Identity in context: internal HWU processes and quality procedures, externality through positioning

within Scottish Higher Education

Pre-entry activities:

• Online profiles via VISION to introduce the cohort community, with access to preparatory reading

• Introduction to Programme Philosophy, Foundation and Learning Design: critical engagement with chosen

frameworks and models

• Spider diagram of the Areas of Activity, Core Knowledge and Professional values of the UKPSF to focus

participants’ development priorities

6.1.1 Course 1 – Research-informed Learning & Teaching Environments

Course 1 Aims

Course 1 aims to provide participants with an understanding of conceptions of learning, and therefore with the

confidence to plan and choose teaching strategies from a variety of approaches and techniques, suitable to support

learning in different modes (locations, levels, roles). The course aims to build the foundation for embedding discipline

appropriate research-teaching linkages in their own practice. Furthermore it aims to encourage participants to

establish their own role within their academic context, and to know where their strengths and weaknesses are while

challenging themselves.

Course 1 Learning Outcomes

1. Demonstrate a critical understanding of student learning.

2. Formulate teaching approaches that foster student learning through the use of various methods, including

technology, appropriate for their disciplinary context, mode, location, and level of learning.

18

3. Reflect critically on their own academic practice in the light of research-teaching linkages and the scholarship

of academic practice.

4. Critically evaluate evidence drawn from existing educational research, scholarship and practice.

5. Evidence engagement with the professional values, core knowledge and areas of activity of the UK Professional

Standards Framework.

6. Evidence the adoption of an inclusive attitude to equality and diversity in their support of student learning.

7. Communicate effectively by engaging in professional dialogue with peers, giving constructive, useful feedback.

Course 1 Syllabus

• Introduction to Scholarship of Academic Practice SoAP (integrated SoTL)

• The UK Professional Standards Framework and your own practice

• The Academic context (HWU and Scottish HE) and your role within

• Conceptions of learning (deep-, surface-, higher-order learning and cognitive domains)

• Approaches to teaching (supporting independent and self-regulated learning)

• Interactive teaching techniques for different groups and types of learners

• Approaches to research-teaching linkages/research-informed teaching

• Issues and opportunities of Equality, Disability and Student Diversity

• Strategies for mentoring students

Course 1 Summative Assessment

• Individual: Critical Reflection on SoAP (integrated SoTL) applied to own academic practice

• Part 1 of structured peer observation: planning on session level

Course 1 Formative Assessment and Feedback

• Opportunity for peer and facilitator feedback during Microteach activity

• Peer and colleague feedback during peer observation

• Seminar discussions and online dialogue

6.1.2 Course 2 – Curriculum in Context: Assessment, Feedback & Curriculum Design

Course 2 Aims

Course 2 aims to introduce participants to aspects of leadership in Learning & Teaching such as designing curricula

and assessing students. It aims to equip participants with a deep understanding of key principles of curriculum design

for learning, and with it key aspects and purposes of summative and formative assessment, and feedback. It further

aims for participants to establish their own role in the university by familiarising them with learning & teaching

related internal university processes and external requirements, as an academic within the global reach of Heriot-

Watt University and Scottish Higher Education.


1. Demonstrate critical engagement with principles of curriculum design by applying them to courses and

programmes within the framework of internal and external requirements.

2. Relate contrasting assessment and feedback goals and functions to their role in educational design and apply

these to student learning.

3. Design teaching and assessment activities that foster student learning and are aligned within the curriculum.


5. Evidence engagement with the professional values, core knowledge and areas of activity of the UK Professional

Standards Framework.

6. Employ principles of interculturality to their own practice and operate proactively within transnational

education.


19

Course 2 Syllabus

• Curriculum design principles (curriculum alignment, values, approaches, models and frameworks)

• Key aspects of summative and formative assessment and feedback

• Designing summative and formative assessment and feedback activities within the aligned curriculum

• Designing learning activities within the aligned curriculum

• Writing good Learning Outcomes and Aims

• Curriculum in context: internal HWU processes (e.g. CAPS, quality standards) and external factors (e.g.

accrediting bodies, QAA subject benchmarks, SCQF level descriptors)

• Interculturality and transnational education

Course 2 Summative Assessment

• Collaborative (e.g. interdisciplinary, multi-location) Learning Design Project, which investigates an area of the

curriculum and engages critically with educational literature.

• Part 2 of structured peer observation, planning on course level (aligned curriculum)

Course 2 Formative Assessment and Feedback

• Peer support during collaborative design project

• Opportunity for peer and course teacher feedback on preliminary presentations

• Seminar discussions and online dialogue

6.2 Year 2 - PGCAP Stage 2: Foundations of Leadership in Academic Practice

Year 2 Curriculum

• Enquiry into academic practice: impact of innovations in the curriculum (learning, teaching and assessing)

• Output from SoAP (integrated SoTL)

• Leadership in Learning & Teaching

6.2.1 Course 3 - Scholarship of Academic Practice I

Course 3 Aims

Course 3, linked synoptically with Course 4, aims to establish participants’ concepts of learning, and thus of their

teaching practice, within the integrated dimensions of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (SoTL) (understood

and referred to as the Scholarship of Academic Practice (SoAP)). It aims to give participants the opportunity to

investigate in-depth a topic of their choice in the field of their own academic practice and thus to lay the foundation

for leadership in learning & teaching. The course aims to imbue commitment to the professional values of the UK

Professional Standards Framework, in-depth engagement with all its areas of activity and core knowledge, a

dedication to continuing professional development in relation to their academic practice, and a desire to

communicate their learning with colleagues.


1. Critically evaluate their learning and teaching practice by choosing appropriate methods.

2. Design, analyse and apply appropriate research techniques to the chosen area of enquiry into their academic

practice.

3. Appraise the purposes of evaluation and research in education and choose the most suitable approach.

4. Ethically collect and synthesise data from a range of appropriate sources to gain an in-depth understanding of

theory and practices in their chosen enquiry area.

5. Relate prior understanding of learning and the curriculum to the chosen enquiry into their academic practice,

and produce original thoughts, ideas, processes, applications, recommendations, etc. to improve student

learning.

6. Develop their arguments based on the appropriate evaluation and interpretation of evidence.

7. Evidence the adoption of scholarship through the integration of research and professional activities in support

of student learning.

20

8. Integrate critical engagement with education literature and practice, and implement pedagogical knowledge to

educational design in their discipline.

9. Evidence commitment to the professional values of the UK Professional Standards Framework through

incorporating educational research and scholarship within all its areas of activity and core knowledge.

10. Disseminate their findings successfully to a wider audience.

Course 3 Syllabus

• Introduction to evaluation in education

• Principles and Practices of Evaluating Learning and Teaching

• Relationship between Evaluation and Research (purposes, approaches, methodologies)

• Evaluating teaching through various feedback mechanisms

• Choosing appropriate evaluation methods

• Research methods in the social sciences (focus on data collection)

• Introduction to research in education

6.2.2 Course 4 - Scholarship of Academic Practice II

Course 4 Aims

Course 4, linked synoptically with Course 3, aims to establish participants’ concepts of learning, and thus of their

teaching practice, within the integrated dimensions of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (SoTL) (understood

and referred to as the Scholarship of Academic Practice (SoAP)). It aims to give participants the opportunity to

investigate in-depth a topic of their choice in the field of their own academic practice and thus to lay the foundation

for leadership in learning & teaching. The course aims to imbue commitment to the professional values of the UK

Professional Standards Framework, in-depth engagement with all its areas of activity and core knowledge, a

dedication to continuing professional development in relation to their academic practice, and a desire to

communicate their learning with colleagues.


1. Critically evaluate their learning and teaching practice by choosing appropriate methods.

2. Design, analyse and apply appropriate research techniques to the chosen area of enquiry into their academic

practice.

3. Appraise the purposes of evaluation and research in education and choose the most suitable approach.

4. Ethically collect and synthesise data from a range of appropriate sources to gain an in-depth understanding of

theory and practices in their chosen enquiry area.

5. Relate prior understanding of learning and the curriculum to the chosen enquiry into their academic practice,

and produce original thoughts, ideas, processes, applications, recommendations, etc. to improve student

learning.

6. Develop their arguments based on the appropriate evaluation and interpretation of evidence.

7. Evidence the adoption of scholarship through the integration of research and professional activities in support

of student learning.

8. Integrate critical engagement with education literature and practice, and implement pedagogical knowledge to


9. Evidence commitment to the professional values of the UK Professional Standards Framework through

incorporating educational research and scholarship within all its areas of activity and core knowledge.


Course 4 Syllabus

• In-depth analysis, evaluation and synthesis of an enquiry topic that brings together prior learning and is based

on Year 1

• Introduction to data analysis in the social sciences (approaches, methods, frameworks)

• Assembling qualitative data from a variety of sources

• Guidance on aspects of good practice in preparing the evaluation study/practitioner research

• Leadership in Academic Practice:

21

o Aspects of the researcher role

o Leadership in Learning & Teaching

• Integrating the Scholarship of Academic Practice

• Disseminating findings and innovating practice in Higher Education

Corse 3 & 4 Summative Assessment

• Enquiry into academic practice: Evaluation Study / Practitioner Research in a variety of outputs (to be

determined together with the course team) such as:

o discussion paper,

o journal article submission,

o digital artefact,

o school learning & teaching paper

o report on enquiry

o others

Courses 3 and 4 in Year 2 are linked synoptically to allow participants to evidence engagement with the scholarship

of academic practice in greater depth and breadth. The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) described synoptic

assessment in the 2011 edition of the Quality Code51 as such:

An assessment that encourages students to combine elements of their learning from different parts of

a programme and to show their accumulated knowledge and understanding of a topic or subject area.

A synoptic assessment normally enables students to show their ability to integrate and apply their

skills, knowledge and understanding with breadth and depth in the subject.

Synoptic assessment suits the enquiry (research/evaluation) into aspects of participants’ practice, by allowing it to

take place over the whole academic year, thus encouraging deep learning through horizontal and vertical integration.

The incentive for synoptically linking the courses in Year 2 is the focus on in-depth analysis, evaluation and synthesis

of a ‘new topic’ that brings together knowledge and skills from the two previous courses in Year 1.

Course 3 & 4 Formative assessment and Feedback

Over the course of study in Year 2, several points of formative assessment and feedback opportunities have been

designed into the curriculum.

Course 3

• October, beginning of Course 3: enquiry ideas to narrow down focus (peer feedback)

• November, middle of Course 3: formalised enquiry project plan (course team feedback)

Course 4

• January, beginning of Course 4: progress discussion session (peer and course team feedback)

• March, middle of Course 4: open session poster presentation or talk of preliminary headline findings in progress

(peers, colleagues, and course team feedback)

51 The Quality Assurance Agency (2011) ‘Chapter B6: Assessment of students and accreditation of prior learning’, in: UK Quality

Code for Higher Education, Part B: Assuring and enhancing academic quality , p.24. Available at: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-

standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/quality-code-part-b (last accessed 20.07.2014)

22

7. Programme Context

7.1 Alignment of the PGCAP with University Strategy (Appendix C3 Strategic Context Programme Mapping.)

7.1.1 Strategic Plan 2013-2018, Global thinking, worldwide influence52

“Heriot-Watt University shall strengthen research intensity in fields of economic and societal benefit,

provide truly global education while maintaining our Scottish roots and delivery excellent student

experience and highly employable graduates”

Most relevant strategic priority:

• Learning, teaching and the student experience

Most relevant stated aim to strengthen graduates’ attributes through:

• Enhanced approaches to teaching, learning and assessment

Relevant priorities to achieve the stated aims:

• Work in partnership with our students to:

o Deliver high quality teaching and learning;

o Recognise increasing student diversity and identify solutions to their emerging needs

• Ensure that the Heriot-Watt curriculum is fit for purpose:

o Being informed by relevant research

• Continually supporting staff to introduce enhanced approaches to teaching, learning and assessment

7.1.2 Learning & Teaching Strategy

Relevant Strategic Objective: Enhancing Student Learning

Key Aim: To deliver a high quality, supportive and challenging learning experience which enables students to fulfil

their potential and prepares them for their future career path. Relevant Priority Areas for Development:

1. Provide an equivalent learning experience across all modes and locations of study

2. Support students in becoming confident, independent learners through a student-centred approach to learning

3. Deliver a curriculum which is research-informed, professionally relevant, international and multi-disciplinary in

its content

4. Enhance approaches to learning, teaching and assessment, drawing on internal and external good practice and

aligning delivery methods with the institution's learning and teaching priorities

Relevant Strategic Objective: Developing Staff

Key Aim: To promote across the University an environment which values and supports staff in the continuous

enhancement of learning and teaching. Relevant Priority Areas for Development:

• Equip staff, wherever they are located, with the skills and expertise to teach, assess and support student

learning in a globalised institution

• Promote research-informed teaching, ensuring that research shapes the undergraduate and postgraduate

taught curriculum

• Encourage the participation of staff in national and international learning and teaching conferences, workshops

and developments

• Facilitate collaboration between staff in different locations in order to enhance educational practice and the

curriculum

• Align academic development activities for staff more closely with the University's Learning and Teaching

Strategy and the UK Professional Standards Framework

52 Heriot-Watt University (2013) Strategic Plan: Global thinking, worldwide influence 2013-2018, Edinburgh: HWU. Available at:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/about/reputation/strategic-plan.htm (last accessed 17.07.2014)

23

7.2 Mapping of PGCAP Learning Outcomes and the UKPSF

Completion of the PGCAP also constitutes the requirement for participating in the formal (non-accredited) route towards

professional recognition as a Senior Fellow of the HE Academy (SFHEA). Graduates may work on developing a portfolio of

evidence, engaging in professional dialogue, and submit this between 1–3 years after graduation to the evaluation panel.

7.2.1 Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (FHEA)

Year 1 (Course 1 & Course 2) = 30 credits

Approach to Recognition

Descriptor 2 covers all areas of activity, core knowledge and commitment to professional values. A fellow of the HEA

is able to evidence successful engagement in appropriate teaching practices, and incorporation of pedagogic

research and/or scholarship. Their continuing professional development in relation to their academic practice has a

positive impact on student learning.

Pathway planned to be submitted to the HEA for Accreditation:

Participants who are enrolled in the PGCAP programme, and successfully complete Year one by gaining 15 credits

each in Course 1 and Course 2, will be eligible for recognition by the HEA as a Fellow.

Descriptor 2 - Demonstrates a broad understanding of effective approaches to teaching and learning support as key

contributions to high quality student learning. Individuals should be able to provide evidence of:

I. Successful engagement across all five Areas of Activity

II. Appropriate knowledge and understanding across all aspects of Core Knowledge

III. A commitment to all the Professional Values

IV. Successful engagement in appropriate teaching practices related to the Areas of Activity

V. Successful incorporation of subject and pedagogic research and/or scholarship within the above activities,

as part of an integrated approach to academic practice

VI. Successful engagement in continuing professional development in relation to teaching, learning,

assessment and, where appropriate, related professional practices

7.2.2 Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (SFHEA)

Year 1 + Year 2 = 60 credits + Portfolio supported Professional Dialogue

Approach to Recognition

Descriptor 3 covers all areas of activity, core knowledge and professional value in-depth. With it come aspects of

mentoring and leadership in teaching and learning in relation to colleagues, and therefore requires longitudinal

evidence. Thorough/in-depth understanding is regarded as expertise in the this context, and gaining expertise is

All of the Areas of Activity, Core Knowledge, and

Professional Values are embedded within the PGCAP.

The programme has been designed that successful

completion of Year 1 “Stage 1: Teaching and Assessing

for Learning in Higher Education” (30 credits) leads to

professional recognition as Fellow of the HE Academy

(FHEA).

Successful of completion of Year 1 (30 credits) and

Year 2 “Stage 2: Foundations of Leadership in

Academic Practice” (30 credits) leads to the PGCert

Award of the Postgraduate Certificate of Academic

Practice (60 credits).

Year 1

Course 1 & Course 2

30 credits

FHEA

Year 1 + Year 2

Postgraduate Certificate

60 creditsPortfolio supported

Dialogue

SFHEA

24

understood to not simply be time-bound but also dependent on self-regulated learning to allow growth of knowledge

and understanding (Zimmerman, 2008a53 and 2008b54).

Pathway planned to be submitted to the HEA for Accreditation:

PGCAP graduates may continue to gather evidence of their engagement with the UKPSF on the D3 level. They will be

supported and receive formative feedback while doing so. Graduates may take between one and three years to

submit their reflective portfolio to support their professional dialogue at the review panel, which will consist of the

members of the PGCAP Award board.

Descriptor 3 - Demonstrates a thorough understanding of effective approaches to teaching and learning support as

a key contribution to high quality student learning. Individuals should be able to provide evidence of:

I. Successful engagement across all five Areas of Activity

II. Appropriate knowledge and understanding across all aspects of Core Knowledge

III. A commitment to all the Professional Values

IV. Successful engagement in appropriate teaching practices related to the Areas of Activity

V. Successful incorporation of subject and pedagogic research and/or scholarship within the above activities,

as part of an integrated approach to academic practice

VI. Successful engagement in continuing professional development in relation to teaching, learning,

assessment, scholarship and, as appropriate, related academic or professional practices

VII. Successful co-ordination, support, supervision, management and/or mentoring of others (whether

individuals and/or teams) in relation to teaching and learning

7.2.3 Areas of Activity, Core Knowledge and Professional Values

Areas of Activity

A1 Design and plan learning activities and/or programmes of study C1 & C2

A2 Teach and/or support learning C1

A3 Assess and give feedback to learners C2

A4 Develop effective learning environments and approaches to student support and guidance C1 & C2

A5 Engage in continuing professional development in subjects/disciplines and their pedagogy, incorporating

research, scholarship and the evaluation of professional practices (embedded Y1)

Core Knowledge

K1 The subject material C1 & C2

K2 Appropriate methods for teaching, learning and assessing in the subject area and at the level of the academic

programme C1 & C2

K3 How students learn, both generally and within their subject/disciplinary area(s) C1

K4 The use and value of appropriate learning technologies C1 & C2 (continuing to C3 & C4)

K5 Methods for evaluating the effectiveness of teaching (embedded Y1 in critical reflection)

K6 The implications of quality assurance and quality enhancement for academic and professional practice with a

particular focus on teaching C1 & C2

53 Zimmerman, B.J. (2008a) ‘Academic studying and the development of personal skill: a self-regulatory perspective’,

Educational Psychologist, 33(2/3), 73-86 54 Zimmermann, B.J. (2008b) ‘Investigating self-regulation and motivation: historical background, methodological

developments and future prospects’, American Educational Research Journal, 45:166, 166-183.

25

Professional Values

V1 Respect individual learners and diverse learning communities C1

V2 Promote participation in higher education and equality of opportunity for learners C1

V3 Use evidence-informed approaches and the outcomes from research, scholarship and continuing

professional development C1 & C2

V4 Acknowledge the wider context in which higher education operates recognising the implications for

professional practice C1 & C2

See See See See also also also also Appendix C4 UKPSF and PGCAPAppendix C4 UKPSF and PGCAPAppendix C4 UKPSF and PGCAPAppendix C4 UKPSF and PGCAP MapMapMapMappingpingpingping....

7.3 Proposed Pathways to Professional Recognition

Proposed Pathway through the UKPSF towards recognition

Year 1 Course 1 + Course 2 30 credits FHEA

Year 2 Course 3 & Course 4 30 credits PGCert

Year

3min – 5max

Reflective Portfolio submission,

supporting Professional Dialogue

Panel

review SFHEA

26

7.3 Quality Assurance55

The PGCAP programme falls under the Quality Assurance Agency’s subject benchmark statement ‘Education Studies’56.

While the benchmark statement from 2007 focuses on undergraduate programmes, the QAA (p.1) “anticipated that

this subject benchmark statement might offer useful points of reference for the design of other programmes in which

education studies have a part to play.”

Specific emphasis is put in the PGCAP on the critical engagement with the “nature of knowledge” and therefore

understanding learning, and the QAA’s concise definition of Education Studies (p.2) is that:

Essentially, education studies is concerned with understanding how people develop and learn throughout their

lives, and the nature of knowledge and critical engagement with ways of knowing and understanding.

Particularly relevant key points of the subject benchmark statement in regard to participants’ learning on the PGCAP

programme are:

• Students should have the opportunity to engage with a number of different perspectives and to evaluate

aims and values, means and ends, and the validity of the education issues in question.

• Students will need to draw upon contemporary research and other relevant educational literature.

• Students should have opportunities to demonstrate the full range of their knowledge and understanding as

well as their capacity to apply and reflect these abilities

The PGCAP programmes should relate to the set of defining principles (p.4) and:

• draw on a wide range of intellectual resources, theoretical perspectives and academic disciplines to

illuminate understanding of education and the contexts within which it takes place

• provide students with a broad and balanced knowledge and understanding of the principal features of

education in a wide range of contexts

• encourage students to engage with fundamental questions concerning the aims and values of education and

its relationship to society

• provide opportunities for students to appreciate the problematic nature of educational theory, policy and

practice

• encourage the interrogation of educational processes in a wide variety of contexts

• develop in students the ability to construct and sustain a reasoned argument about educational issues in a

clear, lucid and coherent manner

• promote a range of qualities in students including intellectual independence and critical engagement with

evidence.

55 See also: The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (2013) The UK Quality Code for Higher Education, Part A:

'Setting and maintaining academic standards' http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Quality-Code-Part-A.pdf

(last accessed 21.07.2014) and QAA Scotland (2014) The framework for qualifications of higher education institutions in

Scotland. http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/FQHEIS-June-2014.pdf (last accessed 21.07.2014) 56 The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (2007) Subject benchmark statement: Education Studies. Available at:

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Pages/Subject-benchmark-statement-Education-studies.aspx

(last accessed 21.07.2014)

27

Part B – University Information

B1 University Policy and Guidance The University publishes many policies and reference information on its website that may be of use and of interest to

students through the programme of their studies at Heriot-Watt University

Wherever practicable, University policy is designed to include all members of the University’s community, both within

and out with the main campus environments.

Important information for students is contained in the Student Learning Code of Practice. This document is attached

in Appendix C4.

Policies of specific interest and relevance to students can be accessed via:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/committees/ltb/ltb-policies.htm

B2 Ordinances and Regulations Heriot-Watt University has a detailed set of rules which governs the operation and management of University business.

These are referred to as Ordinances and these Ordinances are set by the Court, which is the governing body of the

University. The Ordinances provide a regulatory framework for corporate governance,

The University Ordinances are supported by University Regulations which provide a regulatory framework for the

governance of academic-related matters which Staff and Students must adhere to for all academic matters.

There are a number of policies and procedures that underpin the Ordinances and Regulations.

The following section on Academic Support Services often refers to Ordinances and Regulations. These links will provide

you with information and guidance on all matters relating to your academic life.

A full list of Ordinances and Regulations are available at the following web link:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/ordinances/regulations.pdf

B3 Quick Finder Guide to Academic Support Services

1. Academic Support

1.1 Mentoring http://www.hw.ac.uk/quality/studentsupport.htm

and

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/enrolment.htm

PGCAP participants are members of staff

1.2 Professional

Development

Planning

http://www.hw.ac.uk/careers/pdp/index.php

This does not apply to the PGCAP, where staff are the participants

1.3 Student Feedback http://www.hw.ac.uk/quality/studentfeedback.htm

Please refer to the PGCAP programme-specific information in Part A, Section 6

“Programme Overview” of this handbook for further details.

2. Enrolment, Attendance and Periods of Study

2.1 Attendance/

Absence from the

University

Policy on Student Attendance:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/studentattendancepolicy.pdf

Withdrawal from the University:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/withdrawalprocedures.pdf


28

Regulation 1 – General Regulation, paragraph 6

Regulation 18 – Postgraduate Certificates and Graduate Certificates, paragraph 12

2.2 Accreditation of

Prior Learning


Regulation 46 – Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL)

Please refer to the PGCAP programme-specific information in Part A, Section 5.7

“Accreditation of Prior Learning” of this handbook for further details.

2.3 Amendment to

Registration

Application Form:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/amendmenttoregistration.doc

2.4 Change of

Address

Please login to Student Self Service

https://myhwu.hw.ac.uk/HWSAS8/twbkwbis.P_WWWLogin

2.5 Enrolment http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/enrolment.htm

2.6 Periods of Study http://www.hw.ac.uk/ordinances/regulations.pdf


2.7 Student Personal

Information

(Data Protection)

www.hw.ac.uk/students/data_protection_policy.pdf

2.8 Suspension of

Studies

Students are advised to consult with their mentor /Year Co-ordinator/Director of

Studies in the first instance (for the PGCAP contact the programme leader)

Application forms are available on the Registry website – Find a Form,

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/forms.htm

Under the heading of Student Records:

• Amendment to Registration (Approval by School/Institute) (Postgraduate)

• Amendment to Registration Undergraduate and Postgraduate Taught

(Approval By Studies Committees)

2.9 Teaching

Timetables www.hw.ac.uk/timetabling

3. Guidance on Assessment

3.1 Assessment http://www.hw.ac.uk/ordinances/regulations.pdf

Regulation 18 – Postgraduate Certificates and Graduate Certificates, paragraphs 13 –

19

3.2 Common

Assessment and

Progression

System (CAPS)

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/CAPSdiagrampgt.pdf

3.3 Extension to

Assessment

Deadlines


“Assessment” of this handbook for further details.

3.4 Ill Health and

Extenuating

Circumstances -

Assessment


Regulation 9 – Assessment and Examinations, paragraph 9, 12

Regulation 18 – Postgraduate Certificates and Graduate Certificates, paragraph 12,

17, 21

29

3.5 Special

Circumstances in

Assessment

Policy: http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/special-circumstances-policy.pdf

Application Form:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/special-circumstances-form.doc

3.6 Non-Submission of

Assessment



3.7 Submission of

Assessment



4. Examination and Re-assessment Procedures

4.1 Assessment Results http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/examinations.htm



4.2 Discretionary

Credits



4.3 Examinations This does not apply to the PGCAP, which is assessed by 100% coursework

4.4 Examination Diets This does not apply to the PGCAP, which is assessed by 100% coursework

4.5 Examination

Timetables This does not apply to the PGCAP, which is assessed by 100% coursework

4.6 Ill Health and

Extenuating

Circumstances –

Examinations



Regulation 9 – Assessments and Examinations, paragraph 9, 12

Regulation 18 – Postgraduate Certificates and Graduate Certificates, paragraph 12,

17, 21

4.7 Special

Circumstances in

Assessment and

Examinations

Policy: http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/special-circumstances-policy.pdf

Application Form:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/special-circumstances-form.doc

4.8 Examination in

Different Time

Zones Policy: http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/QESCpolicyexams.pdf

4.9 Information on

Student Fees and

Charges This does not apply to the PGCAP, which is free of charge for employees of HWU

4.10 Re-assessment http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/examinations/reassessmentprocedures.htm



4.11 Use of Calculators

in Examinations This does not apply to the PGCAP, which is assessed by 100% coursework

30

5. Grading, Awards and Qualifications

5.1 Requirements for

Awards


Regulation 18 – Postgraduate Certificates and Graduate Certificates, paragraph 15, 19,

21



5.2 Intermediate

Awards http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/awards/intermediateawards.htm

6. Graduation

6.1 Graduation

Information and

Application Forms

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/graduation.htm

7. Conduct, Discipline and Appeals

7.1 Academic Conduct

(including copying,

plagiarism and

collusion)

Further Information is available from: http://www.hw.ac.uk/ordinances/

Ordinance 9 – Student Discipline

Regulation 9 – Assessment and Examinations, Paragraph 8

Regulation 50 – Student Discipline

7.2 Appeals Further Information is available from:


Regulation 36 – Student Appeals

The Student Academic Appeal Policy and Procedures are available at:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/appeals.htm

7.3 Detection of

Plagiarism

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/discipline.htm

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/plagiarismjiscnote.pdf



Please refer to Appendix C6 “Student Guide to Plagiarism” for further details.

7.4 Guidelines for

Students and Staff

on Student

Discipline

Procedures

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/discguidelines.pdf

7.5 Plagiarism Further Information is available from:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/discipline/plagiarism.htm

Plagiarism Guide:

For an English language version, please refer to

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/plagiarismguide.pdf

(this document is attached in Appendix C6)

For the Chinese language version, please refer to

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/plagiarismguidechinese.pdf

31

For the Arabic language version, please refer to

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/resources/plagiarismguidearabic.pdf

Please refer to Appendix C6 “Student Guide to Plagiarism” for further details.

7.6 Use of Mobile

Telephones

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/Discipline.php


Regulation 9 – Assessment and Examinations, paragraph 8

Regulation 50 – Student Discipline

8. Complaints

8.1 Complaints Policy

and Procedures

Further information on the University's Complaints Policy and procedures is available

from: http://www/hw.ac.uk/registry/complaints.htm

9. Suspension, Withdrawal and Exit Award

9.1 Suspension Students are advised to consult with their mentor/Year Co-ordinator/Director of

Studies in the first instance (for the PGCAP contact the programme leader)

Application forms are available on the Registry website – Find a Form,

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/forms.htm

Under the heading of Student Records:

• Amendment to Registration (Approval by School/Institute) (Postgraduate)

• Amendment to Registration Undergraduate and Postgraduate Taught

(Approval By Studies Committees)

Further Information is available from:




9.2 Withdrawal Application Form to withdraw from studies is available form:

http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/studentrecords.htm

9.3 Exit Awards http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/awards/exitawards.htm

32

Part C – Appendices C1 Programme Descriptor

Form P10 Heriot-Watt University – Programme Description Template Version 4.0 (2010/2011

1. Programme Code(s) (recruitment & exit awards)

J1A0

2. Programme Titles for all awards (unabbreviated)

Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice

3. Main Award(s) (to be recruited to)

PGCert

4. Exit Awards (for graduation only)

5. Type

Taught 6. Programme Accredited

by HEA

7. UCAS Code

8. School

SML 9. QAA Subject Benchmarking

Group(s) Education Studies

10. Date of Production/

Revision July 2014

11. Educational Aims of the Programme

The PGCAP programme aims to establish participants’ concepts of learning, and thus of their academic practice, within the integrated dimensions of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (SoTL) which is understood and referred to as the Scholarship of Academic Practice (SoAP), and to provide pathways to professional accreditation by the Higher Education Academy through engagement with the UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF) in accordance with University strategy. It aims to provide participants with the confidence to:

• plan and choose appropriate strategies from a diversity of teaching approaches - including technology

• determine when and how innovation is beneficial to promote high quality learning

• support learning in different modes (locations, levels, roles) through the adoption of key policies and a theory and practice-informed attitude to teaching and learning

• know where their strengths and weaknesses are while challenging themselves. The programme further aims for participants to establish their own academic identity and practice (specifically in Learning & Teaching) as a 21st century Academic within the global reach of Heriot-Watt University and the context of Scottish Higher Education.

12. The Programme provides opportunities for learners to achieve the following outcomes:

Su

bje

ct

Ma

ste

ry

Understanding, Knowledge and Cognitive Skills

• Plan teaching approaches appropriate to the disciplinary context, mode, location, and level of learning, and choose confidently from a variety of suitable teaching methods.

• Demonstrate critical engagement with principles of curriculum design, and their application on course and programme level, both conceptually and within discipline contexts.

• Relate contrasting assessment goals and functions to their role in educational design and how they affect student learning.

Scholarship, Enquiry and Research

• Integrate research in learning and teaching, and determine the most relevant approach to research informed teaching from the research-teaching nexus.

• Evidence adoption of scholarship: integration of research and professional activities in their teaching and support of student learning.

• Evaluate their learning and teaching practice by choosing appropriate methods and methodologies.

• Integrate critical engagement with education literature and practice, and implement pedagogical knowledge to educational design in their discipline.

33

Pe

rso

na

l A

bil

itie

s

Industrial, Commercial and Professional Practice

• Identify and develop their academic identity and situate their academic practice within the global environment of the institution, Scottish Higher Education, and external bodies.

• Evidence the adoption of a critically reflective approach to their academic practice and their own professional values in relation to learning, teaching and research.

• Implement the professional values, core knowledge and areas of activity of the UK Professional Standards Framework as a commitment to continuing professional development and evaluation of their practice.

Autonomy, Accountability and Working with Others

• Adopt an inclusive attitude to equality and diversity, apply principles of interculturality and operate proactively within transnational education.

• Apply effective strategies to mentoring students, and supervision of student projects and research.


• Evaluate the relevance of technology and employ appropriate technologies to improve the student learning environment and experience, and appraise the potential benefits of changing pedagogic practice.

• Engage in professional dialogue with peers through effective communication and by giving constructive, useful feedback.

13. Approaches to Teaching and Learning:

The PGCAP programme is designed to offer choice in mode and location to make it available to all staff who support student learning, in particular all academic staff, regardless of location and learning preference. The key principle to safeguard academic standards across multi-mode/location provision is57:

“Identical Academic Standards; Diversity of Learning Experiences”

The face-to-face division of the programme includes seminars and workshops on the Edinburgh campus over the course of the semester, and - where possible - block-taught sessions on international and other Scottish campuses.

The online division of the programme is delivered through the university’s Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) VISION and uses additional technologies when suitable. The online learning design is based on the Community of Inquiry framework (Garrison & Anderson58) and its three major components of Cognitive-, Social- and Teaching presence. Practical Inquiry, the process embedded in Cognitive presence, considers both the psychological and sociological sides of the educational process identified by Dewey59 as early as 1897.

14. Assessment Policies:

The assessment regulations follow those for other Postgraduate courses in the University, except for one adjustment to the Common Assessment and Progression System: as is common in courses for academic staff, grading is on a pass / refer basis. Assessment involves a series of practical activities, which are aligned with the learning outcomes of the course being assessed. All assignments relate to the participants’ own practice in teaching, learning and research, and are coursework-based.

57 Heriot-Watt University (2014) Code of Practice for the Management of Multi-Location, Multi-Mode Programmes. 58 Garrison, D.R. & Anderson, T. (2003) E-learning in the 21st Century: A Framework for Research and Practice, New York: Routledge. 59 Dewey, J. (1897) ‘My Pedagogic Creed’, The School Journal, Vol LIV, No 3, pp. 77-80

34

C2 Course Descriptors Form C4 Heriot-Watt University - Course Descriptor Template Version 4.0 (2010/2011)

1. Course Code

(1) 2. Course Title

Research-informed Learning & Teaching Environments 3. SCQF Level

11 4. Credits

15

5. Aims

Course 1 aims to provide participants with an understanding of conceptions of learning, and therefore with the confidence to plan and choose teaching strategies from a variety of approaches and techniques, suitable to support learning in different modes (locations, levels, roles). The course aims to build the foundation for embedding discipline appropriate research-teaching linkages in their own practice. Furthermore it aims to encourage participants to establish their own role within their academic context, and to know where their strengths and weaknesses are while challenging themselves.

6. Syllabus

• Introduction to Scholarship of Academic Practice SoAP (integrated SoTL) • The UK Professional Standards Framework and your own practice • The Academic context (HWU and Scottish HE) and your role within • Conceptions of learning (deep-, surface-, higher-order learning and cognitive domains) • Approaches to teaching (supporting independent and self-regulated learning) • Interactive teaching techniques for different groups and types of learners • Approaches to research-teaching linkages/research-informed teaching • Issues and opportunities of Equality, Disability and Student Diversity

• Strategies for mentoring students

7. Learning Outcomes (HWU Core Skills: Employability and Professional Career Readiness)

Subject

Mastery

Understanding, Knowledge and Cognitive Skills Scholarship, Enquiry and Research (Research-Informed Learning)

1. Demonstrate a critical understanding of student learning. 2. Formulate teaching approaches that foster student learning through the use of various methods, including technology, appropriate

for their disciplinary context, mode, location, and level of learning. 3. Reflect critically on their own academic practice in the light of research-teaching linkages and the scholarship of academic practice.


Personal

Abilities

Industrial, Commercial & Professional Practice Autonomy, Accountability & Working with Others Communication, Numeracy & ICT

5. Evidence engagement with the professional values, core knowledge and areas of activity of the UK Professional Standards Framework.

6. Evidence the adoption of an inclusive attitude to equality and diversity in their support of student learning.


35

Form C4 Heriot-Watt University - Course Descriptor Template Version 4.0 (2010/2011)

1. Course Code

(2) 2. Course Title

Curriculum in Context: Assessment, Feedback and Curriculum

Design 3. SCQF

Level 11

4. Credits 15

5. Aims

Course 2 aims to introduce participants to aspects of leadership in Learning & Teaching such as designing curricula and assessing students. It aims to equip participants with a deep understanding of key principles of curriculum design for learning, and with it key aspects and purposes of summative and formative assessment, and feedback. It further aims for participants to establish their own role in the university by familiarising them with learning & teaching related internal university processes and external requirements, as an academic within the global reach of Heriot-Watt University and Scottish Higher Education.

6. Syllabus

• Curriculum design principles (curriculum alignment, values, approaches, models and frameworks) • Key aspects of summative and formative assessment and feedback • Designing summative and formative assessment and feedback activities within the aligned curriculum • Designing learning activities within the aligned curriculum • Writing good Learning Outcomes and Aims • Curriculum in context: internal HWU processes (e.g. CAPS, quality standards) and external factors (e.g. accrediting bodies, QAA subject

benchmarks, SCQF level descriptors) • Interculturality and transnational education


Subject

Mastery


1. Demonstrate critical engagement with principles of curriculum design by applying them to courses and programmes within the framework of internal and external requirements.

2. Relate contrasting assessment and feedback goals and functions to their role in educational design and apply these to student learning.

3. Design teaching and assessment activities that foster student learning and are aligned within the curriculum.


Personal

Abilities


5. Evidence engagement with the professional values, core knowledge and areas of activity of the UK Professional Standards Framework.

6. Employ principles of interculturality to their own practice and operate proactively within transnational education.


36


8. Course Code

(3) 9. Course Title

Scholarship of Academic Practice I 10. SCQF Level

11 11. Credits

15

12. Aims

Course 3, together with Course 4, aims to establish participants’ concepts of learning, and thus of their teaching practice, within the integrated dimensions of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (SoTL) which is understood and referred to as the Scholarship of Academic Practice (SoAP). It aims to achieve this through guided and formative feedback enriched engagement with special interests / inquiry foci in their own academic practice, including aspects of their researcher role, with the goal to produce a well-developed and researched evaluation study at the end of the two synoptically assessed courses.

13. Syllabus

• Introduction to evaluation in education • Principles and Practices of Evaluating Learning and Teaching • Relationship between Evaluation and Research (purposes, approaches, methodologies) • Evaluating teaching through various feedback mechanisms • Choosing appropriate evaluation methods • Research methods in the social sciences (focus on data collection)

• Introduction to research in education


Subject

Mastery


1. Critically evaluate their learning and teaching practice by choosing appropriate methods. 2. Design, analyse and apply appropriate research techniques to the chosen area of enquiry into their academic practice. 3. Appraise the purposes of evaluation and research in education and choose the most suitable approach. 4. Ethically collect and synthesise data from a range of appropriate sources to gain an in-depth understanding of theory and

practices in their chosen enquiry area. 5. Relate prior understanding of learning and the curriculum to the chosen enquiry into their academic practice, and produce

original thoughts, ideas, processes, applications, recommendations, etc. to improve student learning. 6. Develop their arguments based on the appropriate evaluation and interpretation of evidence. 7. Evidence the adoption of scholarship through the integration of research and professional activities in support of student

learning.

8. Integrate critical engagement with education literature and practice, and implement pedagogical knowledge to educational design in their discipline.

Personal

Abilities


9. Evidence commitment to the professional values of the UK Professional Standards Framework through incorporating educational research and scholarship within all its areas of activity and core knowledge.


37


15. Course Code

(4) 16. Course Title

Scholarship of Academic Practice II 17. SCQF Level

11 18. Credits

15

19. Aims

Course 4, together with Course 3, aims to establish participants’ concepts of learning, and thus of their teaching practice, within the integrated dimensions of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (SoTL) which is understood and referred to as the Scholarship of Academic Practice (SoAP). It aims to achieve this through guided and formative feedback enriched engagement with special interests / inquiry foci in their own academic practice, including aspects of their researcher role, with the goal to produce a well-developed and researched evaluation study at the end of the two synoptically assessed courses.

20. Syllabus

• In-depth analysis, evaluation and synthesis of an enquiry topic that brings together prior learning and is based on Year 1 • Introduction to data analysis in the social sciences (approaches, methods, frameworks) • Assembling qualitative data from a variety of sources • Guidance on aspects of good practice in preparing the evaluation study/practitioner research • Leadership in Academic Practice: Aspects of the researcher role & Leadership in Learning & Teaching • Integrating the Scholarship of Academic Practice

• Disseminating findings and innovating practice in Higher Education


Subject

Mastery


1. Critically evaluate their learning and teaching practice by choosing appropriate methods. 2. Design, analyse and apply appropriate research techniques to the chosen area of enquiry into their academic practice. 3. Appraise the purposes of evaluation and research in education and choose the most suitable approach. 4. Ethically collect and synthesise data from a range of appropriate sources to gain an in-depth understanding of theory and

practices in their chosen enquiry area. 5. Relate prior understanding of learning and the curriculum to the chosen enquiry into their academic practice, and produce

original thoughts, ideas, processes, applications, recommendations, etc. to improve student learning. 6. Develop their arguments based on the appropriate evaluation and interpretation of evidence. 7. Evidence the adoption of scholarship through the integration of research and professional activities in support of student

learning.

8. Integrate critical engagement with education literature and practice, and implement pedagogical knowledge to educational design in their discipline.

Personal Abilities


9. Evidence commitment to the professional values of the UK Professional Standards Framework through incorporating educational research and scholarship within all its areas of activity and core knowledge.


38

C3 Strategic Context Programme Mapping Programme Learning Outcomes Strategic aims and priorities

Understanding, Knowledge and Cognitive Skills US: Deliver high quality teaching and learning

Plan teaching approaches appropriate to the disciplinary

context, mode, location, and level of learning, and choose

confidently from a variety of suitable teaching methods.

L&T Students 1: Provide an equivalent learning experience across all modes and locations of study

L&T Students 4: Enhance approaches to learning, teaching and assessment, drawing on internal and

external good practice and aligning delivery methods with the institution's learning and teaching priorities

L&T Staff 1: Equip staff, wherever they are located, with the skills and expertise to teach, assess and

support student learning in a globalised institution

Demonstrate critical engagement with principles of

curriculum design, and their application on course and

programme level, both conceptually and within discipline

contexts.

L&T Students 3: Deliver a curriculum which is research-informed, professionally relevant, international and

multi-disciplinary in its content



L&T Staff 5: Align academic development activities for staff more closely with the University's Learning and

Teaching Strategy and the UK Professional Standards Framework

Relate contrasting assessment goals and functions to their

role in educational design and how they affect student

learning.





Scholarship, Enquiry and Research US: Being informed by relevant research

Integrate research in learning and teaching, and

determine the most relevant approach to research

informed teaching from the research-teaching nexus.



L&T Staff 2: Promote research-informed teaching, ensuring that research shapes the undergraduate and

postgraduate taught curriculum

Evidence adoption of scholarship: integration of research

and professional activities in their teaching and support of

student learning.





L&T Staff 2: Promote research-informed teaching, ensuring that research shapes the undergraduate and

postgraduate taught curriculum

Evaluate their learning and teaching practice by choosing

appropriate methods and methodologies.



39

Integrate critical engagement with education literature

and practice, and implement pedagogical knowledge to


L&T Students 2: Support students in becoming confident, independent learners through a student-centred

approach to learning



Industrial, Commercial and Professional Practice US: Continually supporting staff to introduce enhanced approaches to teaching, learning, assessment

Identify and develop their academic identity and situate

their academic practice within the global environment of

the institution, Scottish Higher Education, and external

bodies.

L&T Staff 3: Encourage the participation of staff in national and international learning and teaching

conferences, workshops and developments

Evidence the adoption of a critically reflective approach to

their academic practice and their own professional values

in relation to learning, teaching and research.





Implement the professional values, core knowledge and

areas of activity of the UK Professional Standards

Framework as a commitment to continuing professional

development and evaluation of their practice.



L&T Staff 5: Align academic development activities for staff more closely with the University's Learning and

Teaching Strategy and the UK Professional Standards Framework

Autonomy, Accountability and Working with Others US: Recognise increasing student diversity and identify solutions to their emerging needs

Adopt an inclusive attitude to equality and diversity, apply

principles of interculturality and operate proactively

within transnational education.

L&T Students 1: Provide an equivalent learning experience across all modes and locations of study



Apply effective strategies to mentoring students, and

supervision of student projects and research.




Evaluate the relevance of technology and employ

appropriate technologies to improve the student learning

environment and experience, and appraise the potential

benefits of changing pedagogic practice.



Engage in professional dialogue with peers through

effective communication and by giving constructive,

useful feedback.





L&T Staff 4: Facilitate collaboration between staff in different locations in order to enhance educational

practice and the curriculum

40

C4 UKPSF and PGCAP Programme Mapping Course 1

Learning Outcomes

UKPSF

Areas of Activity

UKPSF

Core Knowledge

UKPSF

Professional Values

Demonstrate a critical understanding of

student learning.

A2 Teach and/or support learning

A4 Develop effective learning environments

and approaches to student support and

guidance


K3 How students learn, both generally and

within their subject/disciplinary area(s)

V1 Respect individual learners and diverse

learning communities

V3 Use evidence-informed approaches and

the outcomes from research, scholarship

and continuing professional development

Formulate teaching approaches that foster

student learning through the use of various

methods, including technology, appropriate

for their disciplinary context, mode,

location, and level of learning.

A1 Design and plan learning activities

and/or programmes of study


K2 Appropriate methods for teaching,

learning and assessing in the subject area

and at the level of the academic programme



K4 The use and value of appropriate

learning technologies

Reflect critically on their own academic

practice in the light of research-teaching

linkages and the scholarship of academic

practice.

A5 Engage in continuing professional

development in subjects/disciplines and

their pedagogy, incorporating research,

scholarship and the evaluation of

professional practices

K6 The implications of quality assurance and

quality enhancement for academic and

professional practice with a particular focus

on teaching




V4 Acknowledge the wider context in which

higher education operates recognising the

implications for professional practice

Critically evaluate evidence drawn from

existing educational research, scholarship

and practice.







K5 Methods for evaluating the effectiveness

of teaching




Evidence the adoption of an inclusive

attitude to equality and diversity in their

support of student learning.



guidance





V2 Promote participation in higher

education and equality of opportunity for

learners

Communicate effectively by engaging in

professional dialogue with peers, giving

constructive, useful feedback.




41

Evidence engagement with the professional

values, core knowledge and areas of activity

of the UK Professional Standards

Framework

A1-A5 K1-K6 V1-V4

Course 2

Learning Outcomes

UKPSF

Areas of Activity

UKPSF

Core Knowledge

UKPSF

Professional Values

Demonstrate critical engagement with

principles of curriculum design by applying

them to courses and programmes within

the framework of internal and external

requirements.

A1 Design and plan learning activities

and/or programmes of study



guidance







professional practice with a particular focus

on teaching




Relate contrasting assessment and feedback

goals and functions to their role in

educational design and apply these to

student learning.

A3 Assess and give feedback to learners K1 The subject material

Design teaching and assessment activities

that foster student learning and are aligned

within the curriculum.

A2 Teach and/or support learning

A3 Assess and give feedback to learners








Critically evaluate evidence drawn from

existing educational research, scholarship

and practice.







K5 Methods for evaluating the effectiveness

of teaching




Employ principles of interculturality to their

own practice and operate proactively within

transnational education.



guidance





V2 Promote participation in higher

education and equality of opportunity for

learners

Communicate effectively by engaging in

professional dialogue with peers, giving

constructive, useful feedback.




Evidence engagement with the professional

values, core knowledge and areas of activity

of the UK Professional Standards

Framework

A1-A5 K1-K6 V1-V4

42

Course 3 & Course 4

Synoptic Learning Outcomes

UKPSF

Areas of Activity

UKPSF

Core Knowledge

UKPSF

Professional Values

Critically evaluate their learning and teaching

practice by choosing appropriate methods.

K5 Methods for evaluating the effectiveness of

teaching



professional practice with a particular focus on

teaching

Design, analyse and apply appropriate research

techniques to the chosen area of enquiry into

their academic practice.


teaching

V3 Use evidence-informed approaches and the

outcomes from research, scholarship and

continuing professional development

Appraise the purposes of evaluation and research

in education and choose the most suitable

approach.


teaching




Ethically collect and synthesise data from a range

of appropriate sources to gain an in-depth

understanding of theory and practices in their

chosen enquiry area.


development in subjects/disciplines and their

pedagogy, incorporating research, scholarship

and the evaluation of professional practices



Relate prior understanding of learning and the

curriculum to the chosen enquiry into their

academic practice, and produce original thoughts,

ideas, processes, applications, recommendations,

etc. to improve student learning.


K3 How students learn, both generally and within

their subject/disciplinary area(s)







Develop their arguments based on the

appropriate evaluation and interpretation of

evidence.


teaching




Evidence the adoption of scholarship through the

integration of research and professional activities

in support of student learning.











Integrate critical engagement with education

literature and practice, and implement

pedagogical knowledge to educational design in

their discipline.







professional practice with a particular focus on

teaching




Disseminate their findings successfully to a wider

audience. K1 The subject material




Evidence commitment to the professional values

of the UKPSF through incorporating educational

research and scholarship within all its areas of

activity and core knowledge.

A1-A5 K1-K6 V1-V4

43

C5 Student Learning Code of Practice (on campus)

What staff can expect from students

This section is the official wording from the Academic Registry Postgraduate Handbook Template

Most importantly, we expect you to take charge of your own learning. This is your degree; to get the most of your

time at the University you need to be independent, self-motivated and proactive in your studies. We understand

that you may have other demands on your time, but your studies should come first. In addition, we expect:

• Preparation for classes as specified by your lecturers, including studying lecture notes, working on tutorial

questions and participating in online activities. To do well in your studies you will need to undertake a

significant amount of private study in addition to attending your timetabled classes

• Full engagement and attendance on time for lectures, laboratories, seminars and tutorials: during the semester

it is your responsibility to be available to attend classes and, in particular, class tests

• Basic organisational skills, including coming to classes with pen and paper ready to take notes or with

equipment for electronic note-taking, and using a calendar so that you don't forget deadlines and

appointments

• Attention, courtesy and participation during classes; this includes asking and answering questions in lectures

and tutorials

• Respecting deadlines for any assignments

• Taking responsibility for your work, whether completed individually or as part of a group

• Attendance at any scheduled meetings with a member of staff. If you can't make a scheduled meeting, please

notify the member of staff in advance rather than just not attending

• Checking your University email, providing timely responses to emails from members of staff

• Provision of feedback on your courses and programme

• Commitment to your learning and a professional approach to your academic work

• Self-reflection on progress and willingness to learn from feedback on tutorial work, projects, exams, and trying

to improve your work based on that feedback

• Determination and persistence; some topics and problems will be challenging and we expect you to make a

sustained effort to master difficult topics. Lecturers are there to help if you need it

• To keep yourself informed about new and interesting developments in your discipline (beyond what is covered

in your courses)

• Full referencing of all work *

• Adherence with regulations and requirements, including health and safety

• Politeness and respect for all members of the Heriot-Watt University community

(www.hw.ac.uk/equality/Values/Values%20Index.htm) and for the facilities/ services provided.

This includes switching off your phones and other social media during classes

* Full referencing is required in accordance with the conventions of your subject area/discipline. Guidance on

referencing and the use of sources is available from your subject librarian and the Effective Learning Service

(http://www.hw.ac.uk/is/skills-development/study-support.htm). Remember that plagiarism is an academic offence

even if it is unintentional; you need to take care to avoid it.

What students can expect from staff

Teaching is one of the most important duties for members of staff. Although members of academic staff have

research and administrative duties which also require attention, we aim to provide:

• Commitment to helping you learn, with support, encouragement and technical back-up to help you develop

your skills

• Research informed teaching and high quality delivery of learning materials in accordance with the syllabus

• Advice and support on course content at tutorials, laboratories and through pre-arranged meetings

44

• Appropriate supervision of project/dissertation work

• Clear information and guidance on assessment requirements

• Availability for face-to-face meetings, either during scheduled office hours or at pre-arranged times

• Timely oral and written feedback

• Timely provision of marks/grades for coursework and exams

• A prompt response from your mentor

• A timely response to general email questions

• Guidance on specific regulations and requirements including those related to health and safety

• Politeness and respect (www.hw.ac.uk/equality/Values/Values%20Index.htm)

Sometimes members of staff are away on University business and are not able to respond as quickly as normal. If

this happens, they will leave an "out-of-office" message and will advise you who to contact instead.

If you have a problem

If you have a personal or any other type of problem that is having an adverse effect on your studies, please discuss

it with your mentor. We are here to help. You can also discuss any personal problems including counselling,

disability and financial difficulties with the staff in the Student Support (and Accommodation) Office

(www.hw.ac.uk/support, or email [email protected]).

For problems about your course or study programme, talk to the lecturer first. If that doesn't help, you can raise

the matter with your Class Representative or the Year Director of Studies.

Academic Registrar and Deputy Secretary

September 2013; rev January 2014

45

C6 Student Guide to Plagiarism60

This section is the official wording from the Academic Registry Postgraduate Handbook Template

Plagiarism is intellectual theft and is a major offence which the University takes seriously in all cases. Students

must therefore avoid committing acts of plagiarism by following these guidelines and speaking to academic

staff if they are uncertain about what plagiarism means. Those who are found to have plagiarised will be subject

to the University’s disciplinary procedures, which may result in penalties ranging from the deduction of credits

and modules already achieved by students to compulsory termination of studies. Students are advised to refer

to Regulation 50 at http://www.hw.ac.uk/ordinances/regulations.pdf and to the Guidelines for Staff and

Students on Discipline at http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/Discipline.php for further details of how the University

deals with all acts of plagiarism.

Introduction

1.1. This guide is intended to provide students at Heriot-Watt University with a clear definition of plagiarism and

examples of how to avoid it.

1.2. The guide may also be of use to members of staff who seek to advise students on the various issues outlined

below.

C6.1 Definition

1.3. Plagiarism involves the act of taking the ideas, writings or inventions of another person and using these as if they

were one’s own, whether intentionally or not. Plagiarism occurs where there is no acknowledgement that the

writings or ideas belong to or have come from another source.

1.4. Most academic writing involves building on the work of others and this is acceptable as long as their contribution

is identified and fully acknowledged. It is not wrong in itself to use the ideas, writings or inventions of others,

provided that whoever does so is honest about acknowledging the source of that information. Many aspects of

plagiarism can be simply avoided through proper referencing. However, plagiarism extends beyond minor errors

in referencing the work of others and also includes the reproduction of an entire paper or passage of work or of

the ideas and views contained in such pieces of work.

C6.2 Good Practice

1.5. Academic work is almost always drawn from other published information supplemented by the writer’s own ideas,

results or findings. Thus drawing from other work is entirely acceptable, but it is unacceptable not to acknowledge

such work. Conventions or methods for making acknowledgements can vary slightly from subject to subject, and

students should seek the advice of staff in their own School/Institute about ways of doing this. Generally,

referencing systems fall into the Harvard (where the text citation is by author and date) and numeric (where the

text citation is by using a number). Both systems refer readers to a list at the end of the piece of work where

sufficient information is provided to enable the reader to locate the source for themselves.

1.6. When a student undertakes a piece of work that involves drawing on the writings or ideas of others, they must

ensure that they acknowledge each contribution in the following manner:

• Citations: when a direct quotation, a figure, a general idea or other piece of information is taken from another

source, the work and its source must be acknowledged and identified where it occurs in the text;

• Quotations: inverted commas must always be used to identify direct quotations, and the source of the

quotation must be cited;

60 The author acknowledges the following sources of information used in preparing this guide to Plagiarism: “Plagiarism – A

Good Practice Guide”, Carroll, J and Appleton, J (2001) and various extracts from Student/Course Handbooks 2004/2005,

Schools and Institutes at Heriot-Watt University

46

• References: the full details of all references and other sources must be listed in a section at the end of any

piece of work, such as an essay, together with the full publication details. This is normally referred to as a “List

of References” and it must include details of any and all sources of information that the student has referred

to in producing their work. (This is slightly different to a Bibliography, which may also contain references and

sources which, although not directly referred to in your work, you consulted in producing your work).

1.7. Students may wish to refer to the following examples which illustrate the basic principles of plagiarism and how

students might avoid it in their work by using some very simple techniques:

1.7.1. Example 1: A Clear Case of Plagiarism

Examine the following example in which a student has simply inserted a passage of text (in italics) into their

work directly from a book they have read:

University and college managers should consider implementing strategic frameworks if they wish to

embrace good management standards. One of the key problems in setting a strategic framework for a

college or university is that the individual institution has both positive and negative constraints placed

upon its freedom of action. Managers are employed to resolve these issues effectively.

This is an example of bad practice as the student makes no attempt to distinguish the passage they have

inserted from their own work. Thus, this constitutes a clear case of plagiarism. Simply changing a few key

words in such a passage of text (e.g. replace ‘problems’ with ‘difficulties’) does not make it the student’s

work and it is still considered to be an act of plagiarism.

1.7.2. Common Mistakes

Students may also find the following examples61 of common plagiarism mistakes made by other students

useful when reflecting on their own work:

• “I thought it would be okay as long as I included the source in my bibliography” [without indicating a

quotation had been used in the text]

• “I made lots of notes for my essay and couldn't remember where I found the information”

• “I thought it would be okay to use material that I had purchased online”

• “I thought it would be okay to copy the text if I changed some of the words into my own”

• “I thought that plagiarism only applied to essays, I didn't know that it also applies to oral

presentations/group projects etc”

• “I thought it would be okay just to use my tutor's notes”

• “I didn't think that you needed to reference material found on the web”

• “I left it too late and just didn't have time to reference my sources”

None of the above are acceptable reasons for failing to acknowledge the use of others’ work and thereby

constitute plagiarism.

1.8. What follows are examples of the measures that students should employ in order to correctly cite the words,

thought or ideas of others that have influenced their work:

1.8.1. Example 2: Quoting the work of others

If a student wishes to cite a passage of text in order to support their own work, the correct way of doing so is to

use quotation marks (e.g. “ “) to show that the passage is someone else’s work, as follows:

“One of the key problems in setting a strategic framework for a college or university is that the individual

institution has both positive and negative constraints placed upon its freedom of action”.

1.8.2. Example 3: Referencing the work of others

61 Extract from ‘Plagiarism at the University of Essex’ advice copyrighted and published by the Learning, Teaching and Quality

Unit at the University of Essex (http://www.essex.ac.uk/plagiarism/reasons.html ), reproduced with kind permission.

47

In addition to using quotation marks as above, students must also use a text citation. If the work being cited is a

book, page numbers would also normally be required. Thus, using the Harvard system for a book:


institution has both positive and negative constraints placed upon its freedom of action” (Jones, 2001, p121).

The same reference could also be made to a book using the numeric system:


institution has both positive and negative constraints placed upon its freedom of action” (Ref.1, p121).

More often, a piece of work will have multiple references and this serves to show an examiner that the student is

drawing from a number of sources. For example, articles by Brown and by Smith may be cited as follows in the

Harvard system

“It has been asserted that Higher Education in the United Kingdom continued to be poorly funded during the

1980’s [Brown, 1991], whereas more modern writers [Smith, 2002] argue that the HE sector actually received,

in real terms, more funding during this period than the thirty year period immediately preceding it”.

or as follows using the numeric system:

“It has been asserted that Higher Education in the United Kingdom continued to be poorly funded during the

1980’s [Ref 1], whereas more modern writers [Ref 2] argue that the HE sector actually received, in real terms,

more funding during this period than the thirty year period immediately preceding it”.

1.8.3. Example 4: Use of reference lists

Whichever system is used, a list must be included at the end, which allows the reader to locate the works cited for

themselves. The Internet is also an increasingly popular source of information for students and details must again

be provided. You should adhere to the following guidelines in all cases where you reference the work of others:

If the source is a book, the required information is as follows:

• Author’s name(s)

• Year of Publication

• Title of Book

• Place of Publication

• Publishers Name

• All Page Numbers cited

• Edition (if more than one, e.g. 3rd edition,

2001)

If the source is an article in a journal or periodical, the required information is as follows:

• Author’s name(s)

• Year of Publication

• Title of Journal

• Volume and part number

• Page numbers for the article

If the source is from the Internet, the required information is as follows:

• Author’s or Institution’s name (“Anon”,

if not known)

• Title of Document

• Date last accessed by student

• Full URL (e.g. http://www.lib.utk.edu

/instruction/plagiarism/)

• Affiliation of author, if given (e.g. University

of Tennessee)

The way in which the information is organised can vary, and there are some types of work (for example edited

volumes and conference proceedings) where the required information is slightly different. Essentially, though, it

is your responsibility to make it clear where you are citing references within your work and what the source is

within your reference list. Failure to do so is an act of plagiarism.

1.9. Students are encouraged to use a style of acknowledgement that is appropriate to their own academic discipline

and should seek advice from their mentor, course leader or other appropriate member of academic staff. There

are also many reference sources available in the University Library which will provide useful guidance on

referencing styles.

48

C6.3 Managing Plagiarism

1.10. Students, supervisors and institutions have a joint role in ensuring that plagiarism is avoided in all areas of academic

activity. Each role is outlined below as follows:

How you can ensure that you avoid plagiarism in your work:

• Take responsibility for applying the above principles of best practice and integrity within all of your work

• Be aware that your written work will be checked for plagiarism and that all incidents of plagiarism, if found,

are likely to result in severe disciplinary action by the University. The standard penalty is to annul all

assessments taken in the same diet of examinations (for details please refer to Regulation 50 at

http://www.hw.ac.uk/ordinances/regulations.pdf and to the Guidelines for Staff and Students on Discipline

at http://www.hw.ac.uk/registry/discipline.htm).

How your School/Institute will help you to avoid plagiarism:

• Highlight written guidance on how you can avoid plagiarism and provide you with supplementary, verbal

guidance wherever appropriate

• Regularly check student work to ensure that plagiarism has not taken place. This may involve both manual

and electronic methods of checking. A number of plagiarism detection packages are in use at Heriot-Watt

University, one example being the “TurnitIn” plagiarism detection software. See

http://www.hw.ac.uk/is/info-skills-learn.html for more information on how this software package works.

• Alert you to the procedures that will apply should you be found to have committed or be suspected of having

committed an act of plagiarism and explain how further action will be taken in accordance with University

policy and procedures.

How the University will endeavour to reduce student plagiarism:

• Provide clear written guidance on what constitutes plagiarism and how to avoid it directly to your

School/Institute and to you

• Alert you and staff in your School/Institute to the penalties employed when dealing with plagiarism cases

• Take steps to ensure that a consistent approach is applied when dealing with cases of suspected plagiarism

across the institution

• Take the issue of academic dishonesty very seriously and routinely investigate cases where students have

plagiarised and apply appropriate penalties in all proven cases.

49

C7 Programme Redesign References

C7.1 Sources of Redesign

• Strategic Context (part of programme handbook)

o Strategic Plan 2013-2018

o Learning & Teaching Strategy

o Code of Practice for the Management of Multi-Location, Multi-Mode Programmes

• Threshold Survey (findings available)

o Past and current PGCAP participants

• Directors of Learning & Teaching Interviews (report available)

o Main themes: Academic Attributes “be”, Expertise “know”

• Feedback from past and present PGCAP participants

• PGCAP programme self-confidence survey

o Quantitative analysis of longitudinal start- and end questionnaires

• UKPSF 2011 Embedding and Mapping (part of programme handbook)

o Areas of Activity, Core Knowledge and Professional Values

• The Quality Assurance Agency (mapping available)

o QAA Subject benchmark statement: Education Studies

• Scottish Credits and Qualifications Framework (mapping available)

o SCQF Level Descriptor 11, 2012

• Internal Discussions

o Deans of the University, Undergraduate and Postgraduate

o PGCAP Board of Studies (minutes available)

o Feedback from stakeholders on previous drafts (feedback available)

• External Consultancy

o Higher Education Academy Consultant: Professor Mark Davies, University of Sunderland, Principal Fellow of

the HEA, Bioscientist

• Benchmarking against similar provision at research-led universities (resources available)

o University of Edinburgh, Institute for Academic Development, Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice

Programme

o University of Exeter, Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice Programme

o Imperial College London, Educational Development Unit, Postgraduate Programme in University Learning

and Teaching

• Academic Literature (part of programme handbook)

o See PGCAP Programme Review and Map of Review Progress documents

50

C7.2 Re-design Key Processes

Consult with main

stakeholders

Design and map the

Curriculum

Conceptualise content,

context and approach

Develop Programme

Philosophy and Foundation

Conduct semi-structured

interviews with all Directors

of Learning and Teaching.

Map the Masters level


Scottish Credit and

Qualifications Framework

(SCQF) level descriptors

Investigate potential

conceptual thresholds

(Meyer & Land, 2003, 2005)

through a qualitative survey

of current and past PGCAP

cohorts

Embed the programme in

the Scholarship of Teaching

(Boyer, 1990) in a model

that meets the institution’s

needs (e.g. Trigwell et al,

2000; Kreber & Cranton,

2000; Kreber, 2003)

Analyse interviews with

DLTs for emerging themes.

Examine the programme

curriculum for constructive

alignment of its Learning

Outcomes, Assessment and

Activities (Biggs, 1999;

Meyers & Nulty, 2009)

Analyse the Threshold

concept findings and map

against emerging Themes

from DLT interviews and

early conceptualised

structure from School focus

groups

Critically analyse and re-

evaluate the concept of

Reflective Practice (Schön,

1983; Moon, 1999), to

integrate appropriate

reflective models and

frameworks

Meeting with Deans as

representatives of the

academic community and

custodian of probation

Align the Programme and

Course Aims and the


University strategies,

especially the Learning &

Teaching strategy

Connect Schools with the

programme through

embedding “pedagogical

content knowledge”

(Shulman, 1987) i.e.

learning & teaching within

the disciplines

Embed all Areas of Activity,

Core Knowledge and

Professional Values of the

UKPSF (2011) in the

programme and its Learning

Outcomes

Gather feedback from

current and past PGCAP

cohorts, based on Themes

from DLT interviews, start

conceptualising programme

structure

Analyse the emerging

Learning Outcomes to

ensure appropriate

cognitive placement (Biggs

& Collis, 1982; Anderson &

Krathwohl, 2001) and

ensure progression

between consecutive

courses

Consider the position of

academic practice (Clegg,

2012 and Tight, 2013) as

professional practice (Boud

& Brew, 2013) and explore

its scholarly foundation

(Poole & Iqbal, 2011;

Entwistle et al, 2000)

Position the programme’s

beliefs, values and

ideologies in the light of the

experiential and social

critical curriculum models

(Toohey, 1999)

Map the Programme and

Course Aims and the

Learning Outcomes against

the UKPSF 2011

(professional body)

Re-evaluate the nature of

academic literature that

informs the programme and

courses, and the currency

of course reading

Improve articulation (see

Alexson & Kemniz, 2004)

between the two adjacent

programmes LEADS and

PGCAP

Align the programme with

the QAA subject benchmark

statements for Education

Studies

Analyse findings and map

out fundamental

requirements for content,

context and approach

Finalise the aligned

curriculum (LOs,

Assessment, Learning

Activities according to

curriculum design key

concepts

Redesign and restructure

the programme and its

course content and context

Develop the programme

aims, philosophy, values

and underlying concepts to

reflect review findings and

the institution’s needs

PGCAP Handbook 2014/15

Documents

Transcript of PGCAP Handbook 2014/15