Page 93 - Teaching Innovation for the 21st Century

The feedback received resulted in small gains, which enabled the refinement of our processes. It also led us to identify programme coordinators whom we then mentored
to facilitate programme reviews conducted from 2021. Although a key objective was to build capacity, it had not occurred to the team that the process of working with academic teams using the workshop model would achieve such positive outcomes. As a result of these processes, conversations on curriculum and teaching and learning issues continue in departments, and CAPQP regularly receives informal feedback in this regard. The final gain is the fact that this approach to programme reviews appears to have eradicated the view
of programme reviews being seen as a punitive process whose aim is to police academics. Instead, it builds on the premise that quality resides with academics who are the experts in their field, and it provides key input into academics seeking to enhance their understanding of the overarching quality framework. The process is encouraging the embedding of quality practices in the management of programmes and curricula and, as can be seen from the selected extracts above, it is enabling self-reflection and the articulation of the impact on the quality of day-to-day academic activities. Furthermore, and importantly, academics are seeing the value in documenting their reflections to facilitate analysis and contributing through publications to the scholarship of teaching and learning, a key activity supported by the Centre for Academic Staff Development (CASD).
Unlike in the past, programme reviews present the academic teams with opportunities to reflect on their current teaching and learning practices as well as thinking of ways to improve on areas they deemed lacking. To do this effectively, effective programme management and internal quality processes need to be in place at the programme level, and not only at the level of discipline or module. As a Centre whose function is to facilitate these conversations with academic departments, the feedback that we receive enhances our quality processes, particularly regarding programme reviews.
Way forward
To streamline our processes and make them more user-friendly and effective, we continue sharing our experiences with colleagues in other institutions both locally and internationally. As a team, we see opportunities to conduct formal research in areas where we feel not much work has been done. These areas include, but are not limited to, the implantation of programme management principles in a discipline-driven environment and the role of the student voice in quality programme reviews.
Teaching Innovation for the 21st Century | Showcasing UJ Teaching and Learning 2021
91
References
CHE. 2004. Criteria for Programme Accreditation.
Bear, A. and Skorton, D. (eds). 2018. The Integration of the Humanities and Arts with Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in Higher Education: Branches from the Same Tree. Washington (DC): National Academies Press. https:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513036/