The UK’s higher education sector is engulfed in a financial crisis driven by significant reductions in student numbers and income, across both the home and overseas markets. Many institutions have had to take drastic action to deal with budget deficits including course closures, restructuring of departments and staff redundancies among other cost-saving measures.
To address these issues, institutions might consider adapting their teaching offering. We conducted a review to refresh our course content, introduce more choice for students and identify ways to streamline teaching. To find out what adjustments we needed to make, we conducted a review of several of our Level 7 MSc courses covering water, agrifood the environment and energy subjects.
In this resource, we provide tips and lessons learnt from the review which took place last academic year, discussing the importance of taking a collaborative, evidence-based and systematic approach to create a streamlined portfolio of courses.
How we carried out the review
After forming a core portfolio review group consisting of academics and professional staff involved in course management, teaching, quality assurance and the student experience, we evaluated all courses across the portfolio for trends on recruitment figures and financial viability and reviewed them against competitor courses using Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa) data. We conducted a market review to identify opportunities for growth across different regions around the world and align courses to meet current and future demand. This included working with industry partners, recruitment agents and existing students, which ensured that decisions about outcomes for courses within our portfolio were evidence driven.
We surveyed staff to understand current expertise across the school and teaching links to existing courses. The survey also provided an opportunity for exploring new courses and modes of delivery. This activity allowed staff to play an active part in the portfolio review process.
We also surveyed alumni to identify core skills gaps to ensure courses align with current needs and employability requirements in the different sectors. This helped us to evaluate the appropriateness of the courses’ current modular teaching structure and the value of key assessment elements, including group projects and theses. Our alumni provided insight into which courses they believed should be continued, modified or discontinued.
- Collection: Using data to support student success
- What can human behaviour analytics tell us about student learning?
- Spotlight guide: The evolution of authentic assessment
We mapped all current courses across the portfolio against each other, providing a high-level view of how they fit together across the school, the subject matter that is covered within them, whether there was overlap and any opportunities for new provisions. This process involved revisiting course and module descriptors and intended learning outcomes. The exercise helped to identify whether courses were still fit for purpose in a changing landscape and highlighted areas of overlap or similarity where modules could be shared across courses. At the end of this exercise, we set core modules unique to specific courses and identified elective modules that could be shared across courses.
Top tips/lessons learnt:
• When gathering evidence for evaluating trends on recruitment figures, financial viability and competitor courses, examine a variety of data sources, such as Hesa data, to ensure that decisions are evidence-based.
• Passing all the course changes through the validation process requires a streamlining of course validation and approval processes. We dedicated a single day to having back-to-back validation panel meetings which allowed us to compare and contrast the proposed course changes. This in itself is a useful streamlining exercise and demonstrates where efficiencies can be made.
• For a portfolio review to be truly successful, you need to bring along all colleagues involved in teaching with you. To achieve this, a clear communication plan with opportunities for regular, interactive two-way communication is key.
• When mapping out courses, ensure everyone is working in the same space, preferably in person. Working at scale on flip charts or brainstorming on whiteboards enables everyone present to be physically involved in any new design.
• Enough time and human resources are needed to conduct a review on this scale, as changes are likely to be significant. This allows colleagues to have input into the process and is particularly important for courses that are being withdrawn.
• There needs to be enough time to allow for course changes and new courses to be advertised through promotional activity in line with recruitment cycles – this would ideally be a year in advance. This is particularly key when trying to market to regions that have different peaks in their application cycle. Work with marketing colleagues to plan how and when changes will be communicated to existing applicants and the wider market.
• The review needs to be a joint effort between academics involved in teaching and those professional service units that support teaching to ensure that the processes and procedures that feed into teaching are considered, from marketing and recruitment to quality assurance.
• Students need to have a voice in the discussions and can provide unique insights. Course representatives can help facilitate this and provide good feedback on course elective options.
Our teaching portfolio review was not designed to be a purely cost-saving exercise, but it has been helpful to follow a data-driven and systematic approach to understand the value of our courses and streamline our postgraduate taught provision without impacting on the student experience or overall quality of our courses.
Theresa Mercer is a senior lecturer in environmental sustainability and sustainability and environmental management programme director; Gill Drew is an associate professor in geographical systems and the director of education; Jitka MacAdam is a recognised teacher; Peter King is a lecturer in solar energy technologies and the energy programme director; May Sule is a lecturer in water, Sanitation and hygiene; Adriana Encinas-Oropesa is a senior lecturer in design and material and the Jiangsu Cranfield Joint Institute programme director; Lorraine Bell is the head of learning enhancement and design; Elizabeth Hunter is a marketing partner; Catriona Rolfe is an assistant registrar. All contributors are from Cranfield University.
If you’d like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.
comment