Cover Sheet for Bids
(All sections must be completed)
Name of JISC Initiative:
Assessment and Feedback: Strand A
Name of Lead Institution:
Bath Spa University
Name of Proposed Project:
FASTECH:
and Assessment for Students with Technology
Name(s) of Project Partners(s) (except
University of Winchester
Feedback
commercial sector – see below)
This project involves one or more
Name(s) of any commercial partner company No
commercial sector partners
Full Contact Details for Primary Contact:
Name: Professor Paul Hyland
Position: Head of Learning and Teaching
Email: [email protected]
Tel: 01225 875564
Address: Bath Spa University, Corsham Court Centre, Corsham Court, Wiltshire, SN13 OBZ
Length of Project:
3 Years (Years 1 & 2 are JISC part-funded)
Project Start Date:
September 2011
Project End Date:
August 2014
Total Funding Requested from JISC:
Funding requested from JISC broken down across Academic Years (Aug-July)
August 2011 – July 2012
August 2012 – July 2013
95,221
95,228
Total Institutional Contributions:
236,678
Outline Project Description
FASTECH is designed to use readily available technologies to support the systemic enhancement of
assessment and feedback strategies and practices at programme, school and institutional levels. A key aim of
the project is to provide evidence of, and guidelines for, technological improvements and change processes
that can be used to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of assessment and feedback at these levels
throughout the sector.
Our core research activities will be conducted through collaborations involving senior managers, teachers,
technical and administrative staff, students and external advisors. Throughout the project we will also work
with colleagues in other institutions and organisations; drawing upon their experiences and expertise, and
ensuring that the key findings and outputs of FASTECH are provided in ways that best address the particular
needs of their disciplinary communities, institutions and learning environments. By addressing the challenges
of improving practices through research and development at programme level, we will be able to provide
findings that are sensitive to disciplinary needs and traditions, and closely attuned to teachers’ and students’
interests and experiences.
Our project builds upon a new body of knowledge about student and staff experiences of assessment and
feedback, collected from over 22 degree programmes in 8 universities. From these baseline data we have
identified many common and distinctive disciplinary challenges facing students and their teachers, and have
worked effectively with course teams and senior managers to realise enhancements through systemic change
processes. We are now aiming to improve student learning from assessment and feedback by transforming
practices within 33 degree programmes across Bath Spa and Winchester universities, and embedding wellproven technology-supported pedagogies and quality improvements in these institutions.
YES
I have looked at the example FOI form at Appendix A and
included an FOI form in this bid
I have read the Funding Call and associated Terms and
Conditions of Grant at Appendix B
YES
1
1. Appropriateness and Fit to Programme Objectives and Overall Value
to the JISC Community
1.1 Introduction
FASTECH will embed technology-supported improvements to assessment and feedback practices in 33
degree programmes across the range of educational provision at Bath Spa and Winchester universities. This
will directly affect the learning experiences of over 6,500 students; the practices of over 300 teachers; and the
work of over 60 IT-support, administrative and other staff, including senior managers, within the institutions. By
seeding and supporting change within whole programmes, we are able to work-with-the-grain of teachers’
subject interests and departmental loyalties, and the full course experiences of their students. And by
demonstrating the effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of technology-supported learning and teaching
practices within many kind of programmes, we are able to engineer systemic institutional quality
enhancements.
1.2 Baseline Data and Scope of Research
To understand the effects of any changes made to assessment and feedback strategies and practices, it is
essential to have high-quality baseline data. We have outstanding quantitative and qualitative data on all of
the13 degree programmes at the heart of FASTECH research. These data have been gathered through
 Curriculum Audit: documenting the variety, volume, timing and sequencing of formative and summative
assignments; and the forms and amounts of feedback given and received;
 Assessment Experience Questionnaire (AEQ): providing evidence of student experience on 10 scales,
such as ‘quantity of effort’, ‘goals and standards’, and ‘quantity and quality of feedback’;
 Meetings with Teaching Teams: providing knowledge of teachers’ views and problems;
 Student Focus Groups: providing insights into the nature of students’ experiences, and how students
believe these can be improved.
Early findings of this research are available on the ‘Transforming the Experiences of Students through
Assessment’ website ( www.testa.ac.uk ) and have been reported at national/international conferences.
The tools and methods of this research are now familiar to our Programme Leaders and their teaching teams,
and we will use and adapt these instruments (e.g., by concentrating on the effects of technology-based
interventions, in Student Focus Groups) throughout the Project. This will enable us to measure not only the
effects of particular changes due to the use of technologies, but also to understand how these changes are
related to and affect the assessment and feedback cultures and environments of programmes and
departments. Our wider Project work (e.g., on the processes of embedding institutional change, improving staff
training and development, and promoting community take-up) will provide further evidence to support the JISC
community and HE sector.
1.3 Workload Tracking
Attention to ‘Time-on-Task’ has long been recognised a vital principle of good practice (Berliner,1984;
Chickering & Gamson,1987) as it exercises a powerful influence on staff and students’ workloads and
experiences. In times of austerity and higher learner-expectations, it is also of fundamental importance to the
work of managers and developers. Moreover, staff anxieties about increased workloads are widely recognised
as being a major obstacle to the adoption of technologies to enhance teaching and learning.
Throughout the Project we will conduct research to track the total time that teachers and students spend on
assessment and feedback practices each month, and the time spent on particular kinds of activity; such as
providing/reading written feedback on essays, holding/attending face-to-face tutorials, preparing/using
screencast feedback. Data will be collected primarily through Time-on-Task charts (one for teachers, one for
students) which will be emailed to all teachers and students each month. The charts will be trialled and
baseline data collected in the first stage of the Project. As the Project develops, this and our other data will
enable us provide evidence of
 the effects of introducing particular technological changes, on staff and student workloads;
 how workload volumes and patterns change in first and subsequent year of technology-adoption;
 how students’ time on assessment relates to other factors (e.g., ‘quantity of effort’ scale in AEQ);
 the relationships between the effectiveness and efficiency in assessment and feedback practices;
 how managers and developers can plan and promote the greater use of technologies, based upon data
about resourcing needs and benefits.
2
1.4 Assessment and Feedback Challenges Addressed
From our data on 22 degrees at 8 universities, and some of the key findings of educational research and
advice in this field, it is clear that although there are significant variations in students’ experiences of
assessment and feedback according to their course of studies, there is also a strong common pattern of
experience which can be improved through the use of readily-available technologies targeted to meet the
needs of particular disciplines, kinds of student, and learning environments. An outline of these common
challenges and some of the technologies that we will deploy to enhance students’ learning is provided here:
.
Challenge
Students do not report high
levels of effort, and have
difficulty in planning and
distributing effort evenly across
modules, due to poorly designed
patterns of assessment.
Students struggle to understand
course documentation (e.g., of
‘assessment criteria’) and
feedback, to apply written
feedback.
Teachers spend large amounts
of time crafting written feedback
which isn’t attended to.
Students receive feedback too
late to be of use to them.
Peer review and feedback are
patchily implemented and
viewed as ancillary or ‘second
best’.
Illustrative Innovations
Frequent and regular tasks (such as
blogging, chat forums, patch-working
and portfolio activities) delivered
online. Authentic assessment tasks
which require collaboration and filesharing.
Alternative modes of feedback
implemented; e.g., dialogic, oral,
through use of mp3 files and mobile
learning devices. Opportunities for
students to respond to or request
feedback on particular aspects of their
learning are built into online modes
and subject pedagogies
Teachers give more informal and
quicker feedback in oral formats;
either generically or one-to-one,
through mobile technology. Use of
interactive Assessment Cover-sheets,
and online tutoring.
Early-bird generic online feedback in
Jing, mp3s or vimeo clips with
illustrative material help students to
learn from feedback. Personal
Response Systems develop student &
teacher understanding of learning
gaps before assessments are
submitted. Shared online forums
where writing tasks are reviewed by
teacher and student commentary.
Use of software such as PebblePad
and PeerMark in Turnitin.
Self-assessment is often
optional and rarely used.
Use of Pebblepad and other PDP
facilities to help students develop selfreflective skills.
Students do not fully understand
assessment goals and
standards, which often appear
uneven and fragmented due to
diverse assessment practices
and marker variation in modular
schemes.
Use of tools (e.g., Jing screencasts,
Co-genT, and Grademark) to make
standards more transparent through
discussion and exemplification.
Benefits
Students are required to work
more evenly throughout and
across modules. Effective ‘time
on task’ raises student
engagement and leads to higher
understanding and achievement.
Changes to the transmission
model of one-way feedback;
creating more dialogue and
engagement, enabling students
(individually and collectively) to
participate in feedback processes.
Enhancement of feedback that
feeds forward.
Pedagogical relationships are
often strengthened by use of
more personalised forms of
feedback, delivered through
technology. Major efficiency gains
are realised as teachers spend
less time crafting written feedback
that isn’t attended to.
Formative processes are
strengthened as ‘feedback’ is
shifted to the more useful concept
of ‘feed forward’. Forums enable
teachers to build up banks of
exemplars of work with comments
and discussion, for access 24/7.
Students’ self- and peer-review
skills are strengthened, as is their
social experience of learning.
Students actively engaged in
assessment processes will
develop abilities to manage their
own leaning, and enhance peerlearning activities.
More student reflection on their
practices and achievements,
leads to deeper learning. More
holistic learning due to more
feedback at programme level.
Students benefit from shared and
well-articulated standards.
Standards can be transformed
from obscure discourses into
ones that students understand.
and use.
3
1.5 Barriers to Change
Drawing upon the work of Lindquist (1978), Draper and Nicol (2009) identify common barriers to institutional
change. These are summarised in the table below with strategies to address each barrier.
Barriers to Change
Strategies to Address Barriers
1. Major disciplinary
differences in
teaching and learning.
Our programme-level approach acknowledges the diversity of disciplinary
needs, traditions and ‘signature pedagogies’ (Shulman, 2005). We will work in
partnership with subject teams to ensure that technologies chosen are used to
help realise benefits that teaching teams and students will prize.
All subject teams have developed good working knowledge of assessment &
feedback concepts & literature through participation in TESTA. Staff
development activities at subject, institutional and cross-institutional levels will
raise knowledge of IT tools and applications, and support development of
knowledge through our communities of practice.
Our project is directly aligned with our universities’ Learning and Teaching, and
E-learning strategies and plans. These highlight the importance of improving
assessment and feedback processes and policies at programme and
institutional levels through the greater use of e-learning facilities.
Our Management Group will invite and expect PVCs and managers (e.g., of
QA, staff development, IT-services, e-learning) to attend selected meetings
where institutional issues are at stake. Progress reports will be submitted for
discussion and action at key university boards and committees. Heads of
Faculty in both universities support our work and are keen to see it develop.
The value of our approach (collecting empirical data at programme level and
supporting staff and students in developing improvements that are best suited
to their particular needs and environments) has been commended by all of our
programme teams and their students. The benefits of innovations (from
improving the quality of developmental feedback, to increasing the efficiency of
assessment and feedback processes) are therefore well-understood by our
students, teachers and senior managers.
Throughout our universities there is already a widespread interest in the use of
digital media to support assessment and feedback, though the most advanced
usage is usually by individuals within particular modules. FASTECH builds
upon the current roles of the Project Leaders and other staff (such as
departmental ‘E-learning Champions’), and will facilitate the development and
scaling-up of small, free-standing and patchy innovations to deliver systemic
changes at programme, faculty and institutional levels.
2. The isolation of
academics from the
educational research
literature.
3. Weak linkages
between local
innovations and
general strategies.
4. Low levels of senior
management ‘buy-in’
after funding is
secured.
5. Little evidence of the
benefits of innovation.
6. Funding is diverted to
support other
developments already
underway.
1.6 Project Benefits
Institutional Benefits (Bath Spa and Winchester)
 Development of technology-supported assessment and feedback practices to enhance the quality of
teaching and learning, and student experiences, within 33 degree programmes. Target: at least 15
programmes across all Faculties in each institution.
 Development of expertise and capacity to facilitate the transfer of knowledge (based upon well
documented evidence of benefits for students, teachers and managers) about the application of
technologies and effective change processes pertinent to all other degree programmes in the
universities.
 Accelerated attainment of strategic goals for improving students’ learning and assessment
experiences, in accordance with key objectives of each institution’s Learning and Teaching and Elearning strategies. Target: improved ‘Assessment and Feedback’ scores from annual NSS returns.
 Improvement of institutional policies and procedures for Quality Assurance (as through guidelines for
the review, validation and evaluation of courses), staff development and technology support.
 Delivery of 2 conferences and 28 staff training-and-development workshops at departmental,
institutional and cross-institutional levels. Target: 150 staff participating in each institution.
 Improved management of resources to support teaching and learning, founded upon better
understanding of student and staff workloads relating to assessment practices. (A quick survey to
4


support this bid suggests that our teachers spend between 8 and 40% of their total teaching time on
assessment and feedback activities; average is 24%.) Target:15% efficiency savings on staff
‘assessment and feedback’ time throughout each institution.
Strengthening of the relationships between the universities through our Communities of Practice.
Target: further collaborative initiatives and 1 externally-funded project.
Increased opportunities for disciplinary teams to develop and disseminate pedagogical knowledge and
expertise through activities with JISC and the HE community. Target: 8 teacher-researcher
publications/conference presentations from each institution by completion of the Project.
Community Benefits
 Provision of a suite of digital media resources to enable teachers, managers and developers to learn
about programme-level assessment and feedback practices, and how these may be enhanced through
the use of readily available technologies.
 Online and face-to-face support for teachers and others to use the findings, tools and methods of
FASTECH to review and improve their own practices and programmes.
 Opportunities for individuals and groups throughout the sector to share the challenges and findings of
their work by contributing assets to the FASTECH website.
 Opportunities to contribute to online discussions on improving students’ experiences of assessment
and feedback within their disciplines and institutions, through participation in the national &
international community of practice seeded by the work of TESTA, and developed here.
 Access to a wide range of high-quality research findings within & across the disciplines, to support
further research & development throughout the sector, and the ability of departments & institutions to
address issues, such as NSS ‘Assessment and Feedback’ scores, through proven technologies.
 Access to the data, findings and tools of longitudinal research on the effects of technology-supported
changes on staff and student workloads, to support the business case for change.
1.7 Summary of Outputs and Deliverables for the Community
Outputs and deliverables will include: 13 ‘thick descriptions’ of the contexts, research & development
processes & findings, challenges, technologies used, benefits & effects of change within the degree
programmes (Year 2), and 20 case studies of change in other degree programmes (Year 3); 13 student
narratives (one from each programme) describing experiences of change from students’ perspectives; 2 full
accounts of the processes & outcomes of embedding institutional change within the partner universities; 1
manual for teachers & developers to help them apply the tools, methods & findings of the Project to enhance
assessment & feedback practices within their own programmes; 1 guide for Quality Assurance, administrative
& technical staff to help them improve QA procedures and IT-support; 1 guide to the range of technologies
used in FASTECH and the research findings relating directly to their use; 1 full account of the comparison of
staff and student workloads (from Time-on-Task data) with quality of student-learning data, enabling modelling
of ‘Effectiveness and Efficiency through Technology’; 4 progress & 2 evaluation reports. These assets will
make the most of opportunities afforded by digital media to facilitate re-purposing, critical and creative
interactions among key stakeholders (e.g., disciplinary communities & senior managers), and the contribution
of open assets from individuals, groups and organisations throughout the sector. Other Outputs will include 1
FASTECH conference, 12 national/international conference papers, and full participation in all JISC activities
to promote and support the Assessment and Feedback Programme.
2. Quality of Proposal and Robustness of Work Plan
All Project staff, institutional resources and facilities will be in place to secure a strong start in Sept. 2011.
2.1 Educational principles
The fundamental importance of degree programmes in framing the activities of teachers and the learning
experiences of students is well known to students, teachers and researchers. And we know that each degree’s
assessment environment exercises a powerful influence upon what, how much and how effectively its students
learn. Our Project is underpinned by key concepts from Gibbs and Simpson (2004) on the conditions of
assessment which support student learning, and from Nicol & McFarlane Dick (2006) on the principles of good
feedback. It draws upon the work of Boud (2000), O’Donovan, Price & Rust (2008), and Nicol (2010) in its
emphasis on dialogic approaches to improving feedback, and it is informed by a wide range of research on
5
feedback and assessment and the uses of new technologies within and cross the disciplines. The individual
tools and methods of FASTECH research, such as the AEQ and focus groups, are well established, though
our approach to research and development --- working in partnership with teaching teams and students to
engineer the systemic improvements that they would like to make to the assessment schemes and cultures of
their programmes --- is distinctive. From our work to date with staff and students on whole programmes, at
several universities, we are confident that our approach is also proving to be effective.
2.2 Outline of Project Plan: Key Stages and Activities
For planning and monitoring purposes, FASTECH is described here in 5 stages, reflecting key opportunities
and deadlines for development within the rhythms of the academic year. Project milestones will entail the
attainment of all activities at each stage.
Stage 1: Set Up
September - December 2011
 Confirm partnership agreements, staff roles & responsibilities; advise institutional senior managers &
supporters, and external advisors about their roles; appoint student reps for all 13 programmes.
 Design & launch of FASTECH website to share Project resources, expertise, experiences, challenges
& findings, with links to key sector materials to support application of technologies & knowledge of
good practices, student ‘help’ and FAQ facility, and blog for RSS feed. Test & launch website with
FASTECH team, students and external community.
 First FASTECH conference to review plans & build cross institutional CoPs (all FASTECH team; 13
programme leaders & student reps; PVCs, institutional QA managers & IT/e-learning champions;
external advisors, plus JISC A&F programme & projects). Circulate findings for online discussions.
 Work with Programme Leaders, their teaching teams and students, using baseline data (already
collected via TESTA) and training workshops (provided by FASTECH staff and externals) to address
challenges and identify appropriate technologies. Plan technology trials within modules and across
programmes. Collate, compare and share findings.
 Introduce students & staff to FASTECH Time-on-Task charts. Pilot online usage.
 Plan the design of an ‘Effectiveness and Efficiency through Technology’ model, with help of Business
Departments.
 Meetings of Project Management and Development groups to review progress; prepare Time-on-Task
charts for teachers and students; start collection of Project evaluation data; address systemic
challenges (e.g., of sustainability, diversity, & disability); undertake community-building activities with
external advisors and HEI contacts.
 Submission of Project Plan & Web Page (Sept) and Consortium Agreement & Project Website (Nov) to
JISC.
 Progress Report for Stage 1.
Stage 2: Pilot Interventions and Formative Evaluations
January - August 2012
 Programme Teams undertake technology trials with support from E-learning Leader, Project
Developers and Learning-with-Technology Specialists. Impact on students’ learning is tracked through
focus groups and online discussions. Impact on student and staff workloads tracked through Time-onTask charts. Teams report findings and programme development plans at inter-site meetings. Report
from Lead Researcher & Manager to FASTECH Management Team.
 Staff Development workshops led by FASTECH leaders, developers and externals, to support key
groups (e.g., teaching teams; QA, Registry, admin & IT staff; HoDs and senior managers).
 Quality Assurance and IT-support issues (e.g., systems integration) are identified and addressed by
Management Team with senior managers at BSU and UW.
 External conference presentations of FASTECH ‘Work in Progress’.
 Community-building activities: e.g., visits to other HEI to promote take-up of FASTECH.
 Review of Website through student, teacher and community survey and Analytics.
 Baseline & Progress reports and Technical & Supporting Documentation to JISC at required dates.
 Progress Report for Stage 2.
Stage 3: Programme Change and Institutional Development
September 2012 - May 2013
 Programme teams, supported by all FASTECH staff, apply technological changes to whole degree
programmes. Impact on student learning experiences and outcomes is examined through quantitative
and qualitative data collected from Assessment Experience Questionnaire, focus groups, student
6






performance, programme assessment audit (TESTA tool) and Time-on-Task chart. Impact on teachers
and managers, admin & IT supporters of student learning is collected through programme-team
meetings, institutional meetings, and Time-on-Task audit.
Lead Researcher & Manager provides analysis of findings against baseline data for each programme,
and comparative analysis across the 13 programmes.
Inter-site meetings and online discussions to review progress, identify and address challenges.
Progress Report to Management team, key university committees, and JISC.
Staff Development workshops at faculty, institutional and cross-institutional levels.
Community-building activities: e.g., to capture/develop of assets from other HEIs.
External national conferences papers delivered (e.g., for HEA, SEDA, ALT-C).
Progress Report for Stage 3.
Stage 4: Production of Resources and Dissemination of Findings
June - August 2013
 Teaching teams and students produce digital media resources: e.g., case studies of programme-level
change (such as audio-visual materials on the effects of introducing technologies to enhance
assessment and feedback practices), student accounts of change processes and benefits. Assets are
trialled with prospective users in the sector.
 FASTECH leaders & developers produce online guides & manuals to support teachers & educational
developers in the selection & implementation of technologies; a guide for QA staff and supporters of
student learning; and a guide to research findings on technologies used. Materials tested with external
advisors.
 First modelling of ‘Effectiveness and Efficiency through Technology’ based on staff-workload and
student-learning data. Review and development of models with Finance staff.
 First Evaluation Report to JISC and University Boards.
 Second FASTECH conference (attendance as first conference, plus participants from the sector):
keynotes, papers and networked discussions on all aspects of the Project and outcomes to date.
 Report to PVCs, HoDs & senior managers at BSU & UW on project outcomes (including findings on
effectiveness & efficiency; and recommendations concerning QA procedures and QA plans).
 Dissemination events and activities in Schools and Departments (e.g., workshop & posters).
 Training of 26 members of the 13 programme teams for the peer-mentoring scheme.
 Trials of peer-mentoring scheme to spread & embed technology-supported enhancements.
 Project assets uploaded to website, with discussion forums and invitations to contribute materials.
 Progress Report for Stage 4.
Stage 5: Institutional Embedding and Community Benefit
September 2013 - August 2014
 Heads of Learning and Teaching at BSU and UW (Hyland and El-Hakim) work with PVCs & senior
managers, using FASTECH findings to review and revise institutional Learning and Teaching and Elearning strategies & operational plans.
 Workload tracking through Time-on-Task charts is repeated for 13 programmes (for comparison with
first-year-of-change data), and introduced for all new programmes.
 Completion of ‘Effectiveness and Efficiency through Technology’ work. Dissemination of findings.
 Using range of expertise acquired through FASTECH, at least 20 more programme teams at BSU and
UW are supported (e.g., through normal staff development activities and the peer-mentoring scheme)
in the employment of selected technologies to enhance assessment and feedback.
 Production of 20 new case studies, and support for students and others to contribute assets.
 Analysis of FASTECH changes against ‘Assessment and Feedback’ scores from NSS returns.
 External conference papers delivered (e.g., for SRHE, ISSoTL, and discipline-based events).
 Development of website assets with others across the sector.
 Sustainability plans reviewed and secured in strategic plans of the universities.
 Final Evaluation Report to JISC and University Boards.
7
2.3. Leadership and Management
Management Group
Project Leadership will be provided by Prof. Hyland (Chair of the Management Group) who will be responsible
for Project plans and outputs, evaluation, staffing, budgets, reporting, sustainability, external advisors, formal
relationships with external stakeholders, and partnership arrangements. As Head of Learning and Teaching at
BSU, working with the DVC (Academic) and senior managers, he will ensure that the work of the Project is
embedded in the strategic thinking of the university and that its findings inform key decision-making processes.
The Lead Researcher and Project Manager, Dr Jessop (Chair of the Development Group) will be responsible
for the management of research and development activities, including the operational management of the
Project Developers; agreements with Programme leaders, teaching teams and students; staff development
activities (including peer-mentoring scheme), the analysis and presentation of research findings (including
Time-on-Task data); and progress reports at each stage of the Project. The E-Learning Leader, Yassein ElHakim will have overall responsibility for the use of technologies within the Project, including management of
the Learning-with-Technology Specialists; provision of IT training and support; design and management the
Project website; development and testing of assets to meet the needs of the JISC community and HE sector,
and contributing to key-stage progress reports. As Director of Learning and Teaching at UW, he will also
ensure that the work of the Project is well embedded in the university’s strategic planning. Other members of
the Group will include one External Advisor, Prof. Gibbs, who will have special responsibility for advising on
community engagement, institutional embedding, and Project evaluation; two Programme Leaders; two
Student Representatives; and occasional participants (such as PVCs, senior managers and external
stakeholders) where appropriate.
Development Group
The Development Group, chaired by the Lead Researcher and Project Manager, will include the E-Learning
Leader; the two Project Developers, Joelle Adams and Nicole McNab, who will work closely with the 13
programme teams, administrators and technical staff to ensure that research and development activities within
the programmes are delivered and reported; the two Learning-with Technology Specialists, Dr Breeze and Dr
Lewis, who will provide technical advice and support for teaching teams, and support the creation of digital
media assets; two Programme Leaders; two Student Representatives; and occasional participants drawn from
university staff, external advisors, and external users.
2.4 Risk Analysis
Risk
Likelihood
Problems in
Low
appointment of
some staff.
Impact
High
Programme
Leaders are
unwilling or
reluctant to
participate due
to lack of time.
Low
High
Teaching teams
lack ‘buy in’.
Low
High
Difficulties with
application of
technologies &
systems
integration.
Mid
Mid
Risk Management /Mitigating Actions
Some selected staff are on fractional
contracts, but all are keen to take on
FASTECH work. We have identified other
high-quality staff, if needed.
Project Leaders and Developers will provide
support for Programme Leaders. Programme
Leaders may choose to delegate some
responsibility to appropriate members of their
teaching teams (such as E-learning
Champions). Some team members will press
their leaders to ensure full participation.
Teams are keen to improve assessment and
feedback practices using technology, and
have enjoyed working with us. Other teams
are also keen, and we can collect baseline
data on their programmes in Sept/0ct 2011.
Many teachers will recognise this as an
excellent opportunity for professional/career
development. Some will aim to present
findings at discipline/technology events.
Most technologies are already in use among
some individuals or on particular modules at
both universities. Our IT teams are familiar
with these technologies. Learning-withTechnology Specialists and two of our
External Advisors will provide support.
Early-Warning Sign
Resignations or
redeployments.
Poor responses to
communications &
requests for early
meetings.
Some staff express
resistance to any
perceived addition
to workloads.
Slow progress of
teams in
implementing
technology
innovations.
8
Institutional
commitments
are lacking due
to economic
uncertainties.
Mid
Mid
Some students
are reluctant to
use unfamiliar
technologies.
Mid
Mid
HEI and sector
interest in using
technology to
enhance
assessment and
feedback
declines.
Community
does not make
use of online
resources.
Low
Mid
Mid
Mid
Partnership
problems.
Low
Mid
University-funded staff have key institutional
roles to enhance student experience &
deliver institutional strategies; improving
effectiveness & efficiency of feedback &
assessment is essential to this work. All
Project staff are committed to researching &
publishing in this field. Any evidence of
efficiency gains due to the use of common
technologies will be well received.
Where technologies (such as Grademark and
Jing) are currently being used in our
assessment and feedback practices, most
students report very positive experiences.
Students will be active participants and
contributors throughout our project, and we
will provide training sessions and discussion
forums to identify & address any difficulties.
Project team will build upon the national &
international network of TESTA users. Project
Leaders will present ‘Work in Progress’ within
key communities. Website design will
encourage external engagements & assets.
Sector concern for assessment will be
responsive to the student voice.
A high priority of Management Group
throughout Project to ensure that online
assets are provided in ways that are easily
transferable or adaptable for use by the key
user groups, and evidence of benefits is clear
to them. Project team will provide advice
services to support external users.
History of excellent working relations
between key staff, and mutual benefits for the
universities.
Changes to
institutional
strategies and
funding plans.
Programme teams
cannot identify
student reps.
Lack of early
interest in Project
signalled by slow
responses to
requests to review
trials and assets.
Slow growth of
Project network.
Monitoring of site
usage through
Google Analytics
shows assets not
being accessed.
Lack of collegiality
and good channels
of communication.
2.5 Sustainability
Our universities recognise the many benefits from participation in the scheme (see section 1.6 ‘Project
Benefits’ above). A key benefit will be the enhancement of our students’ learning experiences, for this is
fundamental to our universities’ missions and strategic objectives. By the close of the Project it is unlikely that
we will have secured technology-enhanced assessment practices across the whole of our course provision, so
there will be a strong case for sustaining the Project’s work at least until all programmes (including
postgraduate courses) have been enhanced. The building and further development of expertise in the use of
technologies to improve and transform the pedagogies of our disciplines and programmes, will also present us
with many further opportunities for improving students’ learning; for example, though more online tutoring to
increase the flexibility and accessibility of our courses. Such developments will appeal to students, and it may
be anticipated that students’ continuing concern throughout the sector for the quality of their assessment and
feedback experiences will be one of the most compelling reasons for sustaining our Project’s work within and
beyond our institutions. There may also be an excellent business case for maintaining and extending our
investment in the Project. For, if there are only small but widespread efficiency gains that can be sustained
through the effective use of new technologies, these will amount to significant savings that may be re-invested
in the Project.
9
3. Engagement with the Community
We aim to build a strong community of practice through our Project, and will encourage all forms of
participation and contribution; from attendance at technology-training workshops to the creation of digital
media assets. So, wherever practicable, we will publicise our calendar of work as ‘Open Activities and
Opportunities’. We will also try to respond to all external requests for help/support, online or in person. We are
confident that our work will help programme teams, departments and institutions to address important issues
concerning assessment and feedback practices, and to seize opportunities to make improvements. We also
recognise the need to work with the particular needs and interests of external stakeholders:
Students As well as being a primary source of information and opinion, students have a right to be involved in
discussions and decisions about assessment, and can exercise great influence as change agents. FASTECH
will work closely with students as active partners in all aspects of the Project: e.g., focus groups; student reps;
website asset creators, developers; progress monitors and evaluators; conference presenters. Public evidence
of this work will encourage students from other universities, and independent learners, to participate through
online discussions, the contribution of assets, and the use and sharing of student ‘help’ and peer-support
facilities.
Teachers We will engage with teachers within and beyond our institutions primarily because we will be
working to help them realise the practical benefits of using technology to improve their programmes. We will
undertake ‘Community-Building’ (e.g., contributing to discipline-based events) throughout the Project.
Managers FASTECH will address many concerns of managers: e.g., the need for empirical evidence about
the impact of technology-based changes on the effectiveness and efficiency of teachers; and the need for
knowledge about how and which technologies might best address issues arising from NSS returns.
Educational Researchers and Developers From the outset, we will invite researchers and developers to join
in our activities (e.g., by attending workshops, shadowing our researchers, reviewing assets), and will support
groups and institutions who aim to adopt or develop our research. We will disseminate and promote our work
at key conferences and through working with organisations such as SEDA and the HEA.
Administrators and Technology Staff As with teachers, we will invite (online and through professional
associations) external staff to join in our activities and online discussions, and create web assets.
International Community Several universities overseas (e.g., Utrecht and UNSW) are keen to undertake
research and development work that follows our whole-programme approach to improving assessment and
feedback. We will welcome this international enrichment of programme-based research, and will encourage its
development, though we will not fund any costs of engagement.
The JISC Community In addition to participating fully in all JISC dissemination, promotion and evaluation
activities, we are keen to draw upon JISC specialists to maximize impact and outputs.
3.1. Evaluation
Responsibility for Evaluation will be held by the Project leader, supported by the senior external advisor Prof.
Gibbs. Both have extensive experience of evaluating the outcomes of educational research and development
projects in the UK and overseas. We will design our evaluation to pay close attention to JISC’s ‘Project
Planning: evaluation plan’ and ‘InfoNet’s evalkit’. Key aims will be to assess the attainment of Project goals;
and the impacts, benefits and value of our work to various stakeholders within and beyond the partner
institutions. We already have substantial baseline data (section 1.2) on which to build, and we will monitor our
progress through review and reporting processes throughout the Project (section 2.2). Thus at all stages of the
Project we would expect to able to provide a well-documented and externally verifiable account of impact and
benefit to-date. We will gather evaluation data from multiple sources (e.g., students, teachers, managers,
external stakeholders, website users and asset creators) using standard tools and methods (e.g.,
questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, peer review of assets, usage and web-server logs), replicating these
activities at key stages of the Project to inform our progress and create a chronology of the salient moments,
levers and activities of change. In keeping with the JISC Programme, the main focus of our investigations will
be on the impact of technology-based change at programme and institutional levels, and the extent to which
we have enabled the HE community to deliver quality improvements.
4. Budget
4.1 Budget justification
Staffing costs include Project Leader, Paul Hyland (BSU-funded) 0.2 FTE for years 1 & 2, plus 0.1 for year 3;
Lead Researcher & Project Manager, Tansy Jessop (UW) 0.3 FTE for years 1 & 2, plus 0.2 for year 3; E10
learning Leader, Yassein El-Hakim (UW-funded) 0.2 FTE years 1 & 2, plus 0.1 for year 3; Project Developers,
Joelle Adams (BSU) & Nicole McNab (UW) each 3.5 FTE for years 1 & 2; Learning-with-Technology
Specialists, Nicholas Breeze (BSU) & Bex Lewis (UW) each 0.2 FTE for years 1 & 2.
Dissemination and Evaluation costs include External Conferences:10 staff presentations at 1-day
conferences (£200 each), 2 staff x 2 residential conferences (£500 each); 2 FASTECH Conferences: one at
each university, 2 x 30 FASTECH participants @ £50pp, for travel and subsistence; Evaluation supported by
Graham Gibbs (in costs below); Evaluation meetings and materials, £1,000pa in years 1 & 2.; Community
Building: travel to promote use and development of FASTECH (e.g., through creation of additional assets) with
other HEIs and HE providers, £1,000 in each of the 3 years.
Direct Costs include Student Support for student groups and reps from 13 degree programmes (13 x £500 in
years 1 & 2); Programme Team Meetings: a subsistence allowance for each programme (13 x £100 in years 1
& 2); Inter-site Travel and Meetings for FASTECH team, students and other university staff (£2,500 pa in years
1 & 2); Technology Training and Staff Development Workshops for teachers and students (12 institutional
workshops @ £200 each, and 2 cross-institutional workshops @ £500 each) in each of years 1 & 2; Laptops
for project developers (2 x £500, BSU & UW funded); External Advisors: Graham Gibbs, 6 days p.a.. in years
1 & 2, plus 3 days in year 3 (£600pd); Harvey Woolf, 3 days p.a. in years 1 & 2 (£250pd); Shane Sutherland, 3
days p.a. in years 1 & 2 (£500pd); Zak Mensah, 3 days p.a. in years 1 & 2 (£450pd); JISC Travel and
Expenses, £1,800 for travel to 15 JISC meetings (5pa @ £120 each).
4.2 Quantification of Benefits
Please see Sections 1.6 ‘Project Benefits’, and 1.7 ‘Summary of Outputs and Deliverables’ above.
4.3 Project Budget
Directly Incurred
Staff
Post, Grade, No. Hours &
% FTE
August 11–
July 12
£0
August 12–
July 13
£0
August 13– July
14 (Strand A only)
£0
TOTAL £
Total Directly Incurred
Staff (A)
£0
£0
£0
£0
Non-Staff
August 12–
July 13
£1,900
August 13– July
14 (Strand A only)
£600
TOTAL £
Travel and expenses
August 11–
July 12
£1,900
Hardware/software
£1,000
£0
£0
£1,000
Dissemination
£3,960
£4,500
£1,000
£9,460
Evaluation
£4,600
£4,600
£1,800
£11,000
Programme Team
Development
£3,400
£3,400
£0
£6,800
Student Input
£6,500
£6,500
£0
£13,000
Consultancy
Total Directly Incurred
Non-Staff (B)
£3,600
£3,600
£0
£7,200
£24,960
£24,500
£3,400
£52,860
£24,960
£24,500
£3,400
£52,860
August 12–
July 13
£84,018
August 13– July
14 (Strand A only)
£25,230
TOTAL £
Staff
August 11–
July 12
£85,241
Estates
£9,544
£9,544
£2,307
£21,395
Other
£0
£0
£0
£0
Directly Incurred Total
(C) (A+B=C)
Directly Allocated
£0
£4,400
£194,489
11
Directly Allocated Total
(D)
£94,785
£93,562
£27,537
£215,884
Indirect Costs (E)
£71,112
£71,112
£16,159
£158,382
Total Project Cost
(C+D+E)
£190,857
£189,174
£47,096
£427,127
Amount Requested from
JISC
£95,221
£95,228
£0
£190,449
Institutional
Contributions
£95,636
£93,946
£47,096
£236,678
Percentage
Contributions over the
life of the project
JISC
45 %
Partners
55 %
No. FTEs used to
calculate indirect and
estates charges, and
staff included
No
FTEs
4.0
Total
100%
Which Staff PH (0.5) JA
(0.7) NB (0.4) TJ (0.8) NM
(0.7) BL (0.4) YEH (0.5)
5. Previous Experience of the Project Team
5.1 Internal Staff
Project Leader: Prof. Paul Hyland NTF, is Head of Learning and Teaching at BSU, with responsibility for the
design and attainment of learning and teaching strategies, staff development and pedagogical research. He
has been a Head of School, leader of national/international research and development projects and activities
such as CETL and FDTL, Director of History in the HEA’s Subject Centre, and is a founding member of
ISSoTL. His pedagogical publications include ‘Learning from Feedback on Assessment’ (2000). Lead
Researcher & Project Manager: Dr Tansy Jessop is Senior Teaching Fellow at UW and leader of the TESTA
project. She has published on virtual learning, assessment, the minority ethnic student experience, and
learning spaces; and has presented papers at 40 conferences and staff development events in the last five
years. E-learning Leader: Yassein El-Hakim is Director of Learning and Teaching at UW, and a member of
SEDA’s Executive Committee. He is co-leader of TESTA, and institutional lead for JISC’s Co-genT project and
the Benefits Realisation. His research interests are in the ways that technology can be used to enhance
learning, teaching and assessment, and in HE leadership and the change process; the field of study for his
EdD at Southampton University. Project Developers: Joelle Adams is Student Achievement Co-ordinator and
leader of the Writing and Learning Centre at BSU. Her teaching and research is in the field of academic
writing, learning support, and e-learning; Nicole McNab is a Research Officer at UW. She has project
managed Co-gentT BR and worked on several other external projects in the last two years. She has led
institutional development projects using PebblePad, Turnitin, mobile learning devices and e-readers, and has
extensive experience of helping staff to use new technologies to enhance teaching and learning. Learningwith-Technology Specialists: Dr Nicholas Breeze is the Learning and Technology, Support and Development
Officer for the School of Education at BSU. His teaching and publications are in the introduction and use of
learning technology in higher education; Dr Bex Lewis is Blended Learning Fellow at UW. Specialising in the
innovative uses of social media and digital literacy she works with staff and students throughout the university.
She also runs a consultancy service and has a contract with the University of Durham.
5.2 External Advisors
Prof. Graham Gibbs NTF, formerly Director of the Oxford Learning Institute at the University of Oxford. His
work includes over 20 books and 400 articles on teaching, learning and assessment in higher education; Dr
Harvey Woolf, formerly Head of Academic Standards at the University of Wolverhampton, is a specialist in
Quality Assurance and assessment. He has been an institutional auditor and is founder-member of the
Student Assessment and Classification Working Group. Shane Sutherland, Development Director and Cofounder of Pebble Learning, has wide experience of working in and with universities to improve curriculum
design, assessment and reflective learning. Zak Mensah, E-learning Officer for JISC Digital Media, hosted at
the University of Bristol, is a specialist in supporting the creation of high-quality digital media resource.
12