The Work-based Learning Maturity Toolkit

The Work-based Learning Maturity Toolkit The purpose of the toolkit Why it is needed What the toolkit contains How it can be used Outcomes of using the toolkit How it is being used Discussions

Genesis ELRAH Research into work- based degrees and articulation JISC Lifelong Learning & WFD ELRAH / Edinburgh Napier / Telford College University of Bradford CMU (UWIC) University of Westminster Craven College Research Development Pilots (1) Pilots (2) JISC Transformation + others Wolverhampton Middlesex Trinity St David Royal Conservatoire of Scotland

The toolkit helps users/institutions to: Assess current performance in work-based learning. Identify a vision for WBL – and the “enablers” and “barriers” for reaching it. Recommend future actions Plan their change management.

Why is it needed? Increasing numbers of students are opting to learn in the work-place - WBL is therefore becoming more strategically important. Good practice is slowly emerging but not widespread in e.g. – pedagogic models – articulation – use of ICT – partnership working – understanding costing models – how best for institutions to “prepare for work-based learning” Institutions need to assess their performance against what the sector perceives as “mature” - in order to inform policies/plans.

Has this approach been used successfully before? The Higher Education Academy/JISC national e- learning benchmarking programme ( ) “Maturity” toolkits: Pick&Mix eMM ELTI MIT90s

What does the toolkit contain? Criteria and statements of “mature” performance Self-assessment guidelines – to support assessing performance against what the sector currently judges as “mature” A recommended process for using it.

The recommended process Two key options: Use within an institution Collaboration with other institutions – using a CAMEL group

Planning Evidence Collection & synthesis Levelling Workshop Actions Workshop Decide upon focus (e.g. whole institution or faculty or programme) Identify and co-opt stakeholders Identify initiatives to align with (e.g. development of a WBL strategy) Agree the timescale and project plan, including defined roles (e.g. PM) Meeting/workshop with all stakeholders to explain process and build commitment Select relevant criteria from the toolkit & customise as appropriate Identify evidence needed to decide on “level of maturity” for each criterion Identify methods for gathering evidence Collect evidence Synthesis evidence and produce a concise/usable report Review evidence report in “levelling” workshop with all stakeholders Assess your current performance against criteria/level statements Ensure that all stakeholders agree on: Vision & “enablers” / “barriers” for reaching this vision Recommendations for change Commitment & Customisation Convene workshop with group who are identified to take forward the changes Develop action plan – and define measures of success Identify institutional structures, systems & champions which can take forward the changes CAMEL Meeting CAMEL Meeting CAMEL Meeting

“Levelling” workshop For each criterion: Collectively, undertake “levelling” – assessing performance against criteria/level statements – Not developed: No developed plans and little or no consistent practice – Some development: Plans in development and little or no consistent practice – Emerging practice: Plans in development (or developed) and emerging consistent practice – Consistent Practice: Developed plans and consistent practice

What are the areas of focus? Institutional readiness Faculty/school/department readiness Programme design Programme delivery and assessment Partnership engagement The learner experience Effective, usable, accessible technologies

What are the criteria? (1) Institutional readiness WBL strategy & plans Organisation, resourcing and support for WBL Innovation management WBL Customer focus External marketing and communications Processes and procedures for staffing WBL programmes Staff development, recognition and reward WBL procedures and processes for programme validation QA for WBL Systems to support WBL Systems and processes to support registration and enrolment Business, commercial and financial approaches Cross institutional communication and collaboration

What are the criteria? (2) Faculty/school/department readiness WBL strategy & implementation plan Partnership working Business and commercial approaches Training and support for external staff and employers Evaluation and review of programme and pedagogic research

What are the criteria? (3) Programme design Alignment with employer and employee needs Qualifications, pathways and credit Development & planning for validation Alignment with professional standards Curriculum design (structure) Curriculum design (implications) Integration of ICT/e-learning into curriculum design Learning outcomes and progression Commercial/business case Learning materials and resources

What are the criteria? (4) Programme delivery and assessment Transition and induction Delivery Assessment and progressive achievement Student training and support Pedagogic research

What are the criteria? (5) Partnership engagement Long-term sustainable and strategic partnerships Strategic sector initiatives Business-oriented ways of working Understanding employer and employee needs and readiness Appropriate resourcing for forming partnerships Co-ordinated approach to marketing and communications

What are the criteria? (6) The Learner experience Pre-Entry Programme Induction Programme Design, Review and Quality Enhancement Programme Delivery and Support Assessment and Progressive Achievement Transition and Progression

What are the criteria? (7) Effective, usable, accessible technologies Systems to support employer engagement Tools to allow evidence collection, learner reflection and related dialogue Assessment and feedback tools Tools to support communication and knowledge-sharing Management and monitoring of work-based learner data Finance systems Exchange of data between systems Access to information, support, training and guidance

Example: Area of focus 1 Institutional readiness Criterion 1-2 Organisation, resourcing and support for WBL Main statement Organisational structures and mechanisms are in place to resource, support and co- ordinate the WBL strategy/business plan and activities across faculties, schools and departments, though ensuring local ownership. Self assessment guidelines The institution’s committee structure through to SMT/executive level has been reviewed so that agenda’s and reporting channels are designed to ensure that WBL development and progress receives appropriate scrutiny. An institutional WBL business plan is in place and provides a framework within which School/Faculty plans are developed and monitored. There could be a central unit to coordinate WBL activity across the faculties, schools and departments and to lead WBL research, innovation, developments and implementation of effective practice throughout the institution. Mechanisms are in place to resource, support and co-ordinate WBL activities across faculties, schools and departments, though ensuring local ownership. Mechanisms are in place to avoid duplication of effort in WBL through use of cross school/faculty modules and development of generic WBL modules that each faculty/school/department can incorporate into their programmes. A business model and costing policy is in place which encompasses the provision of other WBL services such as the development of bespoke programmes and APEL and recognises the different resourcing model deployed when learning takes place on employer’s premises with WB mentor support.

Example: Area of focus 2 Faculty/school/department readiness Criterion 2-2 Partnership working Main statement Strategic "smart partnerships" are in place - designed to be sustainable and win-win in nature with professional ways of working and involving all key sector stakeholders. Self assessment guidelines Sustainable, strategic partnerships with employers and other providers/bodies are in place that align with each partner's strategic objectives, business plans and career progression. Clear roles and responsibilities are identified for each partner and signed up to. A tripartite model exists between employer, employee and providers in order to create a “win-win” situation for all, where each partner plays to their strengths and recognises each others’ motivations - though accepting the need to be demand- driven. Sector-based partnerships are in place which align with UK, national, regional objectives, regulatory requirements, employer consortia needs and professional standards and involve the appropriate sector, regional and national agencies or initiatives e.g. SSCs, professional bodies, employer consortia. Effective leadership and business-like ways of working are in place where there are mechanisms/structures in place to effect regular dialogue between all partners e.g. via advisory or development groups. Employers are involved in all stages including programme design and delivery. Learners and past learners are involved in the partnership dialogue. Long-term holistic approaches with employers are in place that focus on the employer’s “intellectual capital”.

Example: Area of focus 6 The Learner experience Criterion 6-2 Programme induction Main statement Induction to the programme is pre-planned and tailored for work-based learning. It takes into account personalised development plans and its design recognises that learners may be remote from tutors and other programme participants. Self assessment guidelines A tailored programme induction that can be delivered and accessed flexibly throughout the year in accordance with individual start dates on the programme. A demand led Induction, designed around and informed by Personal development Plans (PDPs) and learner agreements. Opportunities to participate in Programme Induction remotely using online tools and resources. Activities that build learner confidence and relationships with other participants, tutors, peer/work-based mentors and assessors. Programme literature and materials (accessible online) setting out the course content, structure and setting out requirements and expectations. Introduction to support offered to learners including key contacts such as programme tutors, assessors, mentors, administrators, ICT Technical Help/Support Introduction to course documentation, online environments, tools and resources. Opportunities and mechanisms for learners to request further information, clarification and personal support.

Outcomes of using the toolkit An assessment of current performance in work-based learning. A vision for WBL - and barriers and enablers for reaching it. An action plan for change - aligned with institutional structures and systems. Self- assessment Vision Plan

Key areas to address Scaling up from “cottage industry” to co-ordinated approaches Employer/provider partnerships, communications, alignment and sustainability Costing models and cost-efficiency Quality assurance in areas outside of “direct control” e.g. – Work-based mentors/assessors – ICT infrastructure – Digital literacies Student journey experience Cultures/attitudes/working practices Blended learning – e.g. online collaboration, wiki, mobile technologies, blog, e- portfolio, social media, e-APEL, interactive multi-media learning materials, online databases & libraries, e-induction resources Employer impact evaluation / strategic approaches

Using the toolkit Pilots 1 (April – June 2011): – Univ Westminster (focus: School of Computing) – Univ Bradford (focus: School of Engineering) – CMU (UWIC - focus: Dentistry programme, then institution) – ELRAH (focus: Youth Worker upsklling programme, then Edinburgh Napier University) Recent activity: – Pilot 2 institutions (e.g. Wolverhampton, Middlesex….) – Westminster embedding into curriculum review process & using with a Change Academy initiative – LSIS intend to integrate the toolkit with Generator Opportunity – JISC Benefits Realisation programme

ELRAH Pilot ELRAH is a 5 year project funded by Scottish Funding Council to promote progression with advanced standing (articulation) to degree study using qualifications gained in college. One strand has been to explore progression to degree level study using work-based qualifications and the development of work-based degrees programmes A WBL model has been developed and used to inform the development of a new degree in Youth Working. The BA Youth Work has been developed in partnership involving Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh’s Telford College and Edinburgh City Council (Community Learning Development Partnership).

Programme Structure 1 year 3 months 6 months 9 months 1 Year Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4

Community of practice and peer support Blended learning and the constructivist delivery model E-learning and the 3 major components of the online environment: activities, resources and supports (Oliver & Herrington 2001) Delivering the Youth Work Programme

ELRAH Pilot - Reasons for Using the ToolKit Inform the design, development and delivery of the BA Youth Work (Formative Evaluation). Assess Faculty/School Readiness for WBL Promote the Youth Work Model to others in Edinburgh Napier University and to other ELRAH Partners and other Universities in Scotland through the Articulation Hub Network (5 Articulation Hubs in Scotland) and Scotland’s Work-Based Learning Forum (QAA).

ELRAH Pilot - Key Outcomes/ Actions FACULTY/SCHOOL READINESS Outcomes: Partnership roles and responsibilities are clearly defined in Validation Documentation and Collaborative Agreement All partners are involved in programme delivery throughout at all levels. Actions: (Work-based) Mentor and Assessor training is now being put in place for WBL Mentors and Assessors – (Now being developed into a WBL Assessor Mentor Module (SCQF Level 10 and will be accredited by SQA as a PDA at SCQF Level 10 (Autumn 2012) WB/ College staff delivering the programme will be eligible to enrol on the University’s PGCERT in Learning and Teaching in HE (recommendation from validation). Programme leader will co-ordinate monthly communications with WBL Mentors/Assessors and College delivery team to continuously evaluate programme delivery. Procedures to be reviewed to assess time to bring WB products to Market. Assess impact on employer. Assess business model.

ELRAH Pilot - Key Outcomes/ Actions PROGRAMME DESIGN Outcomes: Blended delivery model with only 8 hours of “attendance” required per module (not mandatory). RPL is an integral part of the programme design. Applicants will be assessed using RPL criteria and placed on the programme. Advanced Entry to Stages 2 and 3 will be offered from the outset. Programme offers different exit qualifications all levelled to SCQF. Programme takes 5 years to complete Hons Degree (no loss of time). Validation event was held at partner college. Validation team included representation from across the partnership. Qualification LOs have been mapped to the Occupational Standards for Youth Workers and to relevant subject benchmarks. Framework has generic modules: “ Learner Centred Development in the Work Place / “Active learning in the workplace”. Study Skills are embedded: “Personal Development Planning for Academic Success”.

ELRAH Pilot - Key Outcomes/ Actions THE LEARNER EXPERIENCE Outcomes: Series of leaflets and information events have been developed to promote programme (run in Employer venues). Entry allows for WB qualifications and RPL for people with expertise but not qualifications. Actions: Tailored Induction developed. More work is needed to assess digital literacy levels of recruits. RPL guidelines are being prepared for applicants.

ELRAH Pilot - Key Outcomes/ Actions USEABLE AND ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGIES Outcomes: Technology has been integrated into programme design (e-Portfolios, Blogs etc). Actions: Need for access diagnostics of work-place venues. Induction onwards needs to build digital literacy skills (staff and students). Work is underway to develop technologies for ensuring strong communication between programme team members including work-based mentors. Explore virtual classroom tools ( e.g. Elluminate, Big Blue Button) for sessions that are delivered on campus to accommodate people who can’t attend. Investigate use of audio feedback. Explore e-assessment techniques. Explore e-Apel to increase efficiency.

University of Westminster Curriculum Review Workshop Diagnostics (WBL toolkit integrated with MAC self-reflection tool)

CMU (UWIC) Pilot findings: WBL at CMU is currently fragmented We need to formalise WBL activities A single WBL policy with high level objectives, but with enough scope for localised planning and implementation, is needed. Staff need to feel ownership The Toolkit was found to be unsuitable for use with large groups of stakeholders There was consensus that the toolkit was an accurate, comprehensive representation of WBL maturity Resulting actions: Development of an institutional strategy Work with Schools to create localised plans and activities, structured around the strategy Generate procedures for WBL to inform staff about how to develop and deliver high-quality WBL

Discussions ?