Portfolio Review Pathway FAQ

What exactly is changing? 

•       See our PRP What is Changing? information page for details and a semesters diagram.

When are the changes taking place?

• The new semesters structure and programme and module changes will come into effect for the 2024/25 academic year. Changes will be applied to all Parts simultaneously.

Why now?

• The current volume, variety and complexity of our portfolio places significant burden on academic and professional staff. We therefore have a responsibility to take action that will reduce workloads and create capacity to support innovation and future growth. It’s important that we get this done - delays now will create more work and greater uncertainty for staff and students in the long run. 

What do I need to do specifically for any programme or module changes?

• See our new What Do I Need To Do? information page, and the programme and module design diagrams on the What is Changing? page.

Who has been engaged in designing and developing these changes?

• The project has been proactively engaging with key stakeholders over the last three years, including the student panel and a range of colleagues across Schools and Functions, including SDTLs, Programme Directors, Heads of Schools and Heads of Functions. There have been a number of surveys and breakfast drop-in sessions for all colleagues to attend and engage in. The feedback from colleagues and students has been used to inform the recommendations made and plan implementation activities.

Will any testing or piloting of the changes take place?

• Pilot activity around exams and end of year processes is taking place over 2022/23 and 2023/24 to ensure we are ready for implementation in 2024/25. 

Will it be possible to get everything done in time for 2024/25?

• A detailed plan of activity was developed with academic colleagues in Schools as well as stakeholders in Professional Services. This includes support and check-in points to enable implementation from 2024/25.
• Concerns about current workloads have been heard, and the pace and implementation of the pathway were amended to manage the impact on workload over a longer time period. Other projects were paused or stopped to accommodate this work.
• Delaying further would have put us further behind sector best practices and developments and ultimately require more work to catch up.

How will this benefit students?

• The primary objective of PRP is to improve the student experience. NSS and other feedback indicates dissatisfaction with the quality and consistency of their experience, particularly with regards to assessment, feedback and organisation.
• The proposed changes have been developed with student input and the associated benefits include: 

• Better supporting diversity and inclusion through a more accessible and fair programme and more opportunity for cohort-building.
• Reducing complexity and inconsistency of structure and delivery
• Improved predictability and timeliness of timetable 
• Effective and proportionate assessment, with parity across modules
• Fairness to students re amount and consistency of assessment/workload and assessment load spaced out over the year
• Achieving better student outcomes by meeting (and exceeding) best practice pedagogy
• A more flexible learning experience delivering broader skills
• Employability/better preparing students with skills and experiences for life beyond university 

How will this benefit staff? 

• The current complexities and inconsistencies result in an unsustainable workload for academic and professional services colleagues. The associated benefits include:

• Reducing long term workload (including reduced administration) 
• More even spread of workload across the year.
• More scope for innovation  
• Consistency between colleagues across the University 
• Greater equity and transparency of workload across modules and Schools
• Maximise teaching time across the year without extending the teaching day
• Reduced timetabling complexity leading to fewer class and exam clashes and improved timeliness of timetable availability

Is the motivation to cut costs?

• No, this is not the motivation or purpose. However, the current model is unsustainable. Feedback from students, our NSS rankings, academic and professional services workloads and the financial context of the University as a whole all support the rationale for change. Changes have been developed with student experience at the forefront, whilst also enabling us to use our existing resources more efficiently, to relieve the pressure on staff workloads, and subsequently to create capacity for us to grow and invest in improving the student experience.

Will this affect how we differentiate our offerings to students?

• The objective is to make our programmes more attractive and marketable by providing a portfolio that is distinctive, coherent, reflective of student demand and sustainable; it is not a move to a universal model of large class sizes.

Will this change the choices and options students have?

• Reviewing optionality supports the provision of realistic choices to students and will allow us to deliver more predictable timetabling and assessment scheduling, which supports inclusivity and  helps students to maintain and plan their work/life balance.

 How can Schools tailor the Portfolio review principles to their specific contexts?.

• The implementation of this project will deliver centrally driven and supported but locally owned and implemented changes, with support for Schools/Departments to implement changes in ways which align both to the central principles of the portfolio review redesign as well as to their own specific context of delivery.
• This will support Schools and Functions to reduce programmes and modules, establish simplified and consistent programme expectations, review assessment load, improve teaching practices by adopting a University-wide approach to digital learning, and adapt the timing of teaching and assessment to a two-semester academic year structure.   

What are option baskets? Why are we moving to this system?   

• Optional modules should be grouped into ‘baskets’  from which students select one module per basket. By grouping modules together in baskets, we can provide a more coherent pathway through a programme and more realistic choice to students, as well as facilitating better timetable management and predictability, allowing staff and students to better organise their teaching and study time.
• A pathway is defined as a combination of modules selected by students to make up their journey through an academic Part. UoR has a much higher number of unique student pathways than similar sized institutions which impacts the student experience, since they are offered a plethora of optional choices which cannot realistically be timetabled and creates additional workload for timetabling and exams.

Why the move away from 10-credit modules?

• The current University policy is 20 credits; however, this has not been consistently implemented. More than 50% of modules are 10 credits which has led to over assessment and inconsistency of student effort. Student consultations indicated a preference for larger modules, coherence and depth of knowledge. 
• The recommendation of 20-credit modules, and multiples thereof, outlines a ‘common currency’ for modules which simplifies progression (by minimising the complications of combining modules of different sizes to total 120 credits per year) and which reduces timetabling complexity. This common currency enables greater transparency, and thereby equity, of teaching and assessment loads between modules.  
• We have aimed to deliver a response that keeps pedagogy at the forefront while achieving a reasonable balance with our other objectives to reduce programme complexity and the impacts on staff workloads.
• Fewer modules will mean less competition for student’s time and attention, which should increase student engagement.

Are students' individual programme specifications going to change where the changes happen part way through their studies?

• Yes, students who have already started will continue on the current programme specification until the end of 2023/24, and the new 2024/25 programme specification will then apply for the remainder of their course.

What about joint honours programmes?

• The guidance has been for Schools to design programmes with a ‘joints first’ approach, that is to keep joint programmes at the forefront of the design process. Schools are working together on diets and optionality for joint programmes which may look different to the current programme structures.  
• A key principle is that students need to have done enough in both subjects in order to progress onto a single honours programme at the end of Part 1. 
• Where a 20-credit long-thin module is created, there may be a co-requisite long-thin module to retain workload balance between semesters.

How is inclusion being considered in Programme Design?

• Inclusion underpins all elements of our work. One of the aims of the Portfolio Review process is to ‘Improve the quality of the student experience, ensure learning and assessment is inclusive and increase student satisfaction, through clearer and more equitable expectations … and blended and flexible learning approaches which are truly student centric.’ Recent university-wide initiatives, including the ‘Promoting Racial Justice in Teaching and Learning’ journal, the Race Equality Review and the ‘Decolonising the Curriculum Resources’ booklet highlight the positive value of inclusive teaching and learning for student experience and attainment at UoR.
• PRP’s explicit alignment with the Curriculum Framework – which holds student centredness and inclusion as one of its four programme principles – underscores the primacy of inclusivity. PRP affords the University an unprecedented opportunity to transform institutional practice, widen participation, close the awarding gap, enhance student engagement and build an integrated learning community.
  
• Feedback from our Student Inclusion Partners has been fed into the PRP work and supports the programme design decisions being implemented.