1. Deb Hearle and Nina Cogger

2.  Cardiff University: Periodic Review & Re-validation  Health Professions Council: Re-Approval  College of Occupational Therapists: Re-accreditation  A desire to maximise student involvement in the re- design of the curriculum  Lots of anecdotal evidence regarding benefits but no formal research…  However, very grateful to the Higher Education Academy who kindly sponsored this project.

3.  Student Staff Committee  Bristol on-line survey: (Module or end of Level evaluations)  Bristol on-line survey: (Final year evaluations)  Informal feedback via personal and academic tutors  Student research projects

4. To explore the value of student engagement in curriculum design  To explore student perceptions of their involvement  To explore staff perceptions of student involvement  To identify effective mechanisms for encouraging student engagement in curriculum design

5.  Action Based Project  Mixed methods approach to data collection  Approval from Cardiff University, School of Healthcare Studies Ethics Committee

7.  An invitation to participate issued via email to all students.  Purposive selection: each group constituted 5-6 members from across all levels in each of the part-time and full-time undergraduate routes.  3 student led focus groups to review and appraise the proposed new curriculum and complete Bristol On-line Survey.  All staff to appraise students comments and complete Bristol On-line Survey.

8.  Presented an overview of the newly proposed curriculum and the study aims & objectives.  Split students in two representative groups.  Students given a summary for the whole curriculum plus 2-3 themed modules to review plus guidance of what to look at.  Gave them final module evaluation sheet. Plus

10.  Only 10 volunteers (9 turned up on the day) so two groups were formed.  Unfortunately only 8 questionnaires were successfully completed. Academic level of study

11.  11/25 staff completed questionnaires  44% return – considered representative sample.

12. Level456 Full time 131 Part Time 103 Group1Group 2 2 F/T Level 4&5 3 F/T Level 5&6 2 P/T Level 6 2 P/T Level 4&6

13. Issues explored included:  The perceived impact of student’s contribution in terms of confidence in the programme and preparation for practice.  The nature of contributions.  The impact on students’ understanding of the curriculum design process.  The value gained from this experience.

14.  Students feedback was summarised and emailed to all staff to read prior to completion of questionnaire.  Via Bristol on-line survey staff were asked to reflect on the value of the student contributions in terms of relevance and potential inclusion in the curriculum.

15.  Predominantly qualitative data collected.  These were thematically analysed in order to identify common thoughts and ideas.  Initial findings were returned to participants for comments as valid representations and modified where appropriate.  Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics.

17. …I feel I understand the curriculum a lot more and the importance of content.. ….Greater confidence to express my views in a constructive way.. …reinforced my understanding of reasoning behind structure … How organic the curriculum is in meeting the changing working environment.

18. Students will feel an element of ownership of the curriculum Promotes greater levels to engage in the learning experience Empowering/making a difference  They will better understand the education educational reasoning for what is included

20. …I was able to use my experiences to critically evaluate the new modules …use my own experiences to potentially make new students experiences a little easier..more consistent output of student skill base and knowledge base to help future employers..Complements client centred-ness of the OT philosophy rather than tutor only view.

21. I was able to use my experiences to critically evaluate the new modules …use my own experiences to potentially make new students experiences a little easier..more consistent output of student skill base and knowledge base to help future employers Complements client centred-ness of the OT philosophy rather than tutor only view.

22.  Only questioned undergraduate students  Not as many students as requested hence less representative than would have hoped  Technical “blip” with one student response  Limited timing for reading vs commenting on documentation.  Not ideal timing in terms of student availability/exams etc

23.  Timetable this session in and may get more student participants.  Give curriculum details to students ahead of the focus group to allow time to assimilate information.  Focus groups developing ideas for creativity and entrepreneurial skills throughout the curriculum.  Give students opportunity to help design and write handbooks, assessments and marking criteria.