The Manchester Approach to the HEAR Patricia Clift Martin Teaching and Learning Support Office University of Manchester

Context The University of Manchester is a HEAR trial institution Increasing emphasis on personalisation of learning New structures for advising students Poor NSS results on assessment and feedback Emphasis on volunteering, citizenship and leadership development Lack of pedagogy for the HEAR at a formative stage

Broad Strokes The HEAR should reflect the distinctiveness of the University, the programme and the student The HEAR should be useful Producing the HEAR should not add unnecessary burdens to admin or academic colleagues. Where possible business processes should replace or enhance existing practices and not duplicate The HEAR should be electronic/ digital/ online The HEAR should be produced in a way that is sustainable and cost effective The HEAR should be informed by the needs of stakeholders

Feedback from stakeholders Students: “Some sort of document where all of the information was so they [academic advisors] knew who you were and what you were doing”. Something that would reassure them that there was a REASON to go and have the conversations – more effective structuring Employers: useful to get an understanding of the values, social norms, and aspirations of the University and how that impacts on students immersed in that culture. The main things that differentiate graduates are passion, enthusiasm, desire to contribute and make a difference, and the demonstration of commitment and interest. Academics: Access to useful information for writing references Access to all academic information for effective advising

Section The Academic Curriculum The Programme Statement –Accessible to non-specialist audiences (hopefully!) –Provides context about the learning environment, culture and programme specific opportunities The Transcript –A full record or not? –How much detail? –Dissertation titles

Section 6.1 – The Holistic Experience What is the Manchester Educational Experience? Placements/ Study Abroad Prizes, awards, major scholarships or bursaries? Extracurricular awards? What if they have credit attached? Training? Volunteering? University roles and responsibilities? Assessed or not? Performance or participation?

The Manchester Protocols 1.The Activity supports wider University policy and strategy 2.The Activity is verifiable and is endorsed by the University. 3.The Activity is University wide and the process for accessing the activity is clear and transparent 4.The Activity is not directly part of the academic credit-bearing curriculum. 5.The Activity is not formal employment by the University or a third party. _________________________________ 6.Participation in the Activity is verified but not performance or quality 7.The Activity is defined by regulation. 8.The Activity supports a University process, and is normally determined by election or nomination

The Formative HEAR Annual or live feed? Full or partial data-set? Links to other data? Availability to view? Integration? Minute detail or just top-level? Where does it fit with everything else that’s available to students?

Developing the pedagogy: HEARing student voices Broad: How do students make educational choices within differently structured curricula? How do employment aspirations influence choice? How can the HEAR best be designed to meet student needs? How does formative assessment influence academic and career development? Specific: What factors influence unit choice? What methods of feedback do students prefer and find useful? How can the HEAR be constructed to inform choice and maximise use of feedback?

Making the formative HEAR useful What do students need the University to record about them? What to academic advisors need to know – and when? Where does the formative HEAR sit in terms of the information and resources available to students? –Is it valid? –Is it verified? –Is it accurate? –Is there enough detail or too much? –Is this duplicated elsewhere? –How does it link up?

Links to other initiatives Personal Development Planning Academic Advising eLearning – learning environments Resource development Customisation

Further findings There is a place for a formative “HEAR”-type document. At the least, it will enable students to track their own skills. In addition, it could enrich and encourage deeper discussion between academic advisors and students. Right now, both choice and feedback are often seen as solitary endeavours. The students feel isolated and do not seem to be integrating all of the resources and feedback at their disposal. There is an interesting question about assessment and feedback. Do they always need to be linked? Can/should students have the chance to turn in work to be looked at but not counted in the course? Will that help make the feedback more valuable?

Indications for improvement/Areas for further investigation Use the formative HEAR as a platform for conversation and planning between academic advisors and students Create “plans” between and inside modules that allow students to see the skill set they are expected to learn and the feedback to expect. Devise ways to move feedback “beyond” the mark. Further investigation into structures that encourage conversation and community building between students and staff Explicitly react to student feedback and support their use of feedback to improve skills