Annex 7
HEFCE Summary Periodic Review Report Form
Department reviewed
Warwick Institute of Education
Courses reviewed
Undergraduate:
Postgraduate:
BA Early Childhood Studies (full-time, part-time and 2+2
variants)
BA (QTS)
Sure Start Recognised Sector Endorsed Early Years
Foundation Degree/Foundation Degree in Learning Support
BPhil (Education) (Kenya Variant)
Primary PGCE
Early Years PGCE
Secondary PGCE (including flexible variant)
Date of Review
10th March 2004
Objectives of Review
To review the courses of study (undergraduate and postgraduate) of each department on a
five year cycle in order to assess whether the quality of the educational provision is
satisfactory and to highlight areas of good practice and aspects for improvement.
Conduct of Review
(A list of panel members and methods used e.g. scrutiny of formal written submission; face-to-face
meetings etc.)
The membership of the Review Panel was as follows:
Professor Robin Wensley (Chair), Warwick Business School
Dr Phil Mizen Department of Sociology
Dr Janet Read, School of Health and Social Studies
Dr Julia Khan, Centre for English Language Teacher Education
Dr Moli Paul, Warwick Medical Schools
Mrs Angela Nurse, Department of Childhood Studies, Canterbury Christchurch University
College
The Review Group considered the Institute’s submission and then met on 10th March 2004,
with representatives from the Institute, to conduct a discussion on undergraduate provision.
Following this the Panel met with a group of undergraduate student representatives from the
Institute. The Panel then met with staff representatives to discuss postgraduate provision. A
meeting with PGCE student representatives then took place.
A discussion was then held with Professor Alma Harris, Director of the Institute, and Dr Janet
Ainley, Deputy Director of the Institute, to follow-up on any significant issues.
Evidence base
(A list of evidence used and a note on the use of External Examiners’ reports; reports from accrediting
bodies (where appropriate); staff and student feedback; feedback from former students and their
employers)
The Review Panel considered the Institute’s submission, including: a self-evaluation
document, including statistical information and module maps and course specifications; Joint
Council and Senate Strategy Committee Review of the Institute of Education 2000; Subject
Benchmark Statements; course prospectuses and Institute website information; student
handbooks and promotional literature.
The Review Group also considered External Examiners’ reports, judgements and reports from
OFSTED, preceding Periodic Review Reports, SSLC reports, Annual Review Reports and the
Quinquennial Review Report 2003. The Review Group discussed provision with current
students. The Review Group looked at issues raised in these different reports and how the
Institute had responded both to comments made by the student body and recommendations
in external examiners’ reports.
Contribution from external peers
(Their selection; role and involvement)
Mrs Angela Nurse, MA, Head of Department of Childhood Studies, Canterbury Christchurch
University College. Mrs Nurse was nominated by the Director of the Institute of Education,
and approved by the Chair of the Review Group, Professor Robin Wensley. Mrs Nurse
elected to receive the Institute’s submission for Periodic Review, to attend the Periodic
Review meetings on 10th March and to submit her comments on the Periodic Review Report.
Main characteristics of the courses covered by the Review
(The Review panel’s view of the content and approach of the courses under review including notable
strengths)
In the course of this Periodic Review, it was acknowledged by the Institute that there was an
inherent tension in much of the undergraduate and postgraduate provision between the dual
pulls of research and teaching. The Director of the Institute indicated that the future course of
the Institute would be more focussed on research imperatives, but that the requirements of
external bodies would continue to exert pressure to maintain the standards of its practitionerbased provision.
The Panel noted the strengths of the provision as being the liaison with partnership schools,
the pastoral support arrangements for students, the effectiveness of the Staff Student Liaison
Committees, and the strong track record of recruitment to the 2+2 programme.
Conclusions on innovation and good practice
(Identification of aspects of the courses which are particularly innovative or represent good practice)
The Panel was pleased to note that SSLC minutes and reports, and oral reports of students
commended the helpfulness and efficiency of the Subject Librarian.
The Panel was pleased to hear about the effectiveness of the First Class system through
which students are able to access notes and messages about the course and to keep in
touch.
The Panel commended the Institute for its new initiative of operating a surgery for BA Early
Childhood Studies undergraduates run by different members of staff in turn and
recommended that feedback be sought from undergraduates on this system in due course.
The Panel commended the Institute for the beginnings of a multi-professional approach to
employability for BA Early Childhood students through its collaborations with the School of
Law and the School of Health and Social Studies and endorsed the Institute’s plan to review
and strengthen these connections.
Conclusions on quality and practice
(Whether the course specification is being delivered; students are achieving the intended learning
outcomes and whether quality and standards are being achieved)
The Review Group concluded that the course specifications were being delivered and that
students were achieving the intended learning outcomes. The Review Group felt that
systems to monitor quality and standards were being well managed. The Institute was
encouraged in its bid to improve the utility and quality of management information and
commended in its responsiveness to issues raised by both students and external examiners.
Conclusions on the courses
(Their continuing currency and validity in the light of developing knowledge, practice in its application
and developments in teaching and learning)
The Review Group concluded that teaching was generally of very high quality The Review
Group concluded that the courses were up-to-date, but, as acknowledged by the Institute, that
there would be benefits in concentrating the efforts of staff teams into a narrower portfolio of
courses.
It was noted that the Institute will discontinue the BA (QTS) and B Phil Ed. While the Panel
acknowledges that the Institute had had experience of coping with such transitions in their
provision, and the fact that the teaching team for the BA (QTS) overlapped with the team for
the Primary and the Secondary PGCE, allowing for continuity in staffing, the Panel echoes the
recommendation of the Quinquennial Review Panel April 2003 in calling upon the Institute to
put in place a strategy for the transition.
Recommendations for action
(Recommendations to remedy any identified shortcomings and to enhance quality and standards;
areas for commendation and improvement and an indication of the significance and urgency of
recommendations)
The Panel made a number of recommendations to assist the Institute further to improve the
quality of its undergraduate and PGCE provision.
(a)
(b)
The Institute was asked to consider the advisability of the following:
(i)
Developing a detailed staffing plan to ensure that there is a best fit
between the skills and academic interests of the staff and the future
needs of the Institute.
(ii)
Developing a strategy for the management of the transitional period
of provision overhaul, particularly in the BA (QTS), and any resultant
staffing changes.
(iii)
Examining ways in which the Institute can seek consistently to
provide feedback to students on issues they bring forward.
(iv)
Ensuring that students on flexible and part-time variants of courses
are aware of how to feed in issues to the SSLC system.
(v)
Clarifying the initial advice and information given to new intakes to
the Early Childhood Studies and Foundation Degree courses on
securing QTS training places.
(vi)
Exploring ways in which more proactive, directed and diverse careers
advice could be provided in conjunction with the Careers Service.
The Institute was asked to consider the desirability of the following:
(i)
Examining other providers of ITT in the area to consider the market
distinctiveness of the Institute’s provision and to examine how
competition may affect future developments.
(ii)
Giving continued consideration to the flexibility of the teaching
timetable, particularly in relation to flexible and part-time courses.
(iii)
Considering introducing ‘taster sessions’ for its incoming 2+2
students, through which students could experience lectures and
seminars before arriving at Warwick.
(iv)
Considering how better to address the transfer of students from the
part-time Foundation Degree to the full-time BA Early Childhood
Studies degree.
(v)
Seeking to consolidate and articulate the relationship between
research and teaching and between practical and theory-based sides
of provision, perhaps incorporating more ‘action research’ into course
content.
THE UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION
Response to the Periodic Review of the Undergraduate Degrees and PGCE Courses:
4-10 March 2004
The Institute welcomes the Review report and notes the positive comments made about both
the Undergraduate and PGCE courses from students and student representatives. It also
welcomes the commendations from the panel about the effectiveness of the operation of its
SSLCs and the quality of its student support mechanisms.
In response to the recommendations made by the panel, we would like to offer the following
observations:
(a) (i)
The Institute has prepared a detailed staffing plan and this has been shared with
Professor Palmer and Mr D Beaton.
(ii)
The Management Group and Executive Committee will oversee the transitional
period of provision overhaul, particularly during the phasing out of the BA(QTS).
(iii)
The Director of Undergraduate Studies (who is also BA(QTS) Course Leader)
has a central responsibility for informing BA(QTS) students of all relevant
changes occurring as a result of the phasing out of this course. WIE has a
strong commitment to continuing to provide a top quality course for BA(QTS)
students and keeping any disruption to a minimum.
(iv)
The Institute will be formally reviewing the Flexible PGCE route in 2004/05.
(v)
Student representatives on SSLCs are encouraged to take responsibility for
giving feedback to their colleagues about issues raised. More systematic
feedback from the Institute is being explored, but does put a considerable
burden on administrative staff.
(vi)
Students on the Flexible PGCE are informed via a number of routes (their
enrolment pack, the course handbook, messages on FirstClass and letters sent
during the course) that there is a FITT variant of the SSLC, and are told how they
can raise issues. Part-time ECS students are also informed about SSLC
procedures and half of the SSLC’s student members have to be part-time
students. The Institute acknowledges that the pattern of study for these students
may produce some difficulties in participating fully in the SSLC system, and is
encouraging greater use of email and FirstClass for this purpose.
(vii)
The system of surgeries for ECS students will be evaluated this year; the SSLC
Annual Report 03-04 commends the effectiveness of the system.
(viii)
For students on ITE courses, careers advice about entering teaching is provided
by the Institute. It would be inappropriate, and indeed actively discouraged by
TTA/OfSTED, for WIE to be actively encouraging students on ITE courses to
seek jobs outside teaching. All students are made aware of the services offered
by the Careers Service, and those students who have made the decision
themselves that they do not wish to teach, or are on non-ITE routes, are
encouraged to make use of these.
(ix)
ECS/FdA students are provided with information about the entry requirements
for PGCE, but the Institute acknowledges that there are some complex issues
here which may not be adequately covered by the existing advice. In particular
the Institute will be seeking ways to work with partner Colleges to improve coordination and consistency in the information which is supplied by them to
students taking Access or 2+2 routes.
(x)
The results of all student evaluations are used in the preparation of Annual
Module and Course Reviews. All staff at Departmental Meetings, to which a
student representative is also invited, consider Course Reviews. Some
evaluations, e.g. the BA(QTS) annual year group evaluations, are considered at
SSLC and the results posted on FirstClass.
However, the Institute
acknowledges that this should be done more systematically across all courses
and will seek ways to address this which will keep the additional burden on staff
to a minimum.
(b) (i)
Our TTA provision has been considered as part of a wider market research
exercise that has been undertaken. The results of this will enable us to
understand the market distinctiveness of the Institute’s provision and how to
maximise this.
(ii)
The Institute will continue to monitor the concerns of both staff and students in
considering how best to provide flexibility in the teaching timetable, and to
balance the needs of full- and part-time students.
(iii)
The induction programme does outline a wide range of IT services but clearly
this needs to be reinforced. For 04-05, arrangements have already been made
to have IT Services staff available during registration to ensure that students
receive appropriate advice and guidance.
(iv)
The transition from College to University is acknowledged to be a difficult one for
some students. The Early Childhood team are currently considering options to
improve this transition process.
(v)
The timing of study support workshops for FdA and ECS students will be
reviewed, though as these already take place during the Autumn term there is
limited scope for change.
(vi)
The Institute is considering proposals to make links between PGCE courses and
M level provision, which will create more opportunities for making explicit links to
research. Students within the BA(QTS) and ECS courses do engage in research
projects as part of their existing courses.
The Institute would like to note that it is not in receipt of any funding dedicated to easing it
through its transitional period and that while market research has been undertaken to assist
us in reshaping our postgraduate provision, this has been without the support of the
University.
Professor A Harris
11 May 2004.