Jisc case studies wiki Case studies / Course Data - Brunel University
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Course Data - Brunel University

Funded by the: Jisc e-Learning programme.

Lead Institution: Brunel University.

Learner Provider Type: Higher Education

Project Duration: January 2012 - March 2013

Key Words: Course Data

Case study tags: course data, process improvement, course information, brunel university, appreciative inquiry, ai, six thinking hats, change management, tools and techniques, stakeholder engagement

 

Note: This is an abridged version of this project's final report.  The full version is available here.  

 

CDATA: Capturing Data Accurately, Timely and Accessible

Brunel University

Project Summary

The ‘CDATA’ project took an holistic view of Brunel’s ‘course’ data and explored how technology could be utilised to ensure it is: accurate; timely; fit-for-purpose; and accessible to relevant ‘data-users’. The project concentrated on identifying efficiency gains – from an Institutional back-office standpoint – whilst increasing the effectiveness of the management of ‘course data’ for all stakeholders across the University. This final report details the outcomes and reflections of the CDATA project - a 15 month project spanning January 2012 to March 2013. It should be noted that some of the outputs of the project will reach fruition post funding period. However, a number of outputs are already in place, namely:

  • Development and implementation of the composite methodology - ApprecHATive Inquiry
  • Review of existing processes and creation of ‘As Is’ and ‘To Be’ process maps
  • Identification of new processes through stakeholder feedback
  • Development of a specification for the Programme Management (Approval) Facility (ProM) – the system to support enhanced business processes and capture of accurate data
  • Development of a specification for the Programme Management (Archive) Facility
  • Stimulated important discussions with other participating universities and software suppliers regarding the business processes associated with course data storage and dissemination. These are, at a high level, relatively standard business processes, and there are potential opportunities for sharing technology solutions to increase efficiency in the sector.
  • Produced a feed file of course data in the specified XCRI-CAP 1.2 format. This has been run thorough the XCRI-CAP 1.2 Online Validator on 22nd October 2012 and it successfully passed. The CDATA project team has approval in principle to expand the number of courses, previously agreed, to be included in Brunel’s XCRI-CAP feed file. It is proposed that all postgraduate taught courses to be included in the file, with data refreshed daily.
  • Setup a COOL URI (www.brunel.ac.uk/xcridata)
  • Influenced the development of the SITS Curriculum Planner component. Expanding the component from 12 entities to 33 entities through involvement in a Tribal/Jisc Course Data Programme work group.

 

Once all the Programme Management (ProM) facilities are in place, we believe the institution’s course data will be more accurate, consistent, fit-for-purpose, timely and accessible.

 

Dissemination has also played a significant role in this project helping to ensure that, in addition to the deliverables themselves, the key lessons and successes of the project have been shared with the sector as a whole.

 

What did we learn?

The team held a SITS Cluster Assembly. Just before the Assembly came to a close we issued all delegates with a feedback form to find out what they thought about the day. The form was divided into 3 sections; the first concentrated on the organisation of the event, the second section focused on the individual sessions… and the third was an open box to leave any additional comments... All feedback was collated and graphical visualisations created…. As a consequence of organising such an event we picked up a range of tips and advice for other projects who also considering hosting as assembly. We have already disseminated our advice to the community via the Jisc online meeting on 18th May, however, a brief overview of our guidance to others is listed below:

 

  1. Topic choice: Choose your topic carefully and really think what you want to get out of the day - do not just ‘go with the flow’. Our project team had quite a few brainstorming sessions before we decided on our agenda. Our primary concern was our audience, we always made a decision on the basis that we wanted the delegates to leave at the end of the day feeling like they had made good use of their time and gone away with a brain full of information and not just a stomach full of food.
  2. Work as a team: Very self-explanatory, but we cannot emphasise enough how important this is, especially during the day of the event. Be aware of what everyone in the team is doing and be prepared to do anything.
  3. Administrative duties: Do not underestimate them, all the little things add up. For example, IT requirements, WiFi availability, venue, catering, delegate list, registration forms, dietary requirements, accessibility requirements, parking permits, presenters, budget management, name badges, posters for the room, twitter hashtag, keeping everyone in the team informed of progress, keeping in contact with delegates, keeping the event alive. It is not difficult, but it is time consuming.
  4. Organised: Be highly organised and keep on top of registration forms. This might mean making a checklist, or a wall full of post it notes. Whatever your style, you will never leave anything to memory and hence run the risk of not completing an action.
  5. Eventbrite: An excellent free online tool to use to organise events, which does not require a high level of IT competency.

 

…the development of the composite methodology, ApprecHATive Inquiry. Evidence from the AiP workshops showed that our methodology created an optimal environment for stakeholder engagement. Participants enjoyed the activities and collaboratively worked together. From this experience, we learned the following lessons:

 

  1. Negativity is Natural: People are initially negative, but once negative views are ‘aired’, stakeholders are capable - and enjoy - designing and contributing to a positive outcome.
  2. Personal Communication: Communication via email, especially to a large group, can be rather impersonal leading to the recipient feeling that they do not really need to action it as others have also been sent the email – ‘no one will notice if I don’t reply’ syndrome. Therefore, a lesson learned within this project was to target stakeholders personally. Inviting stakeholders, in our case to workshops, via individual emails was a somewhat lengthy process, but it did have a significantly positive impact on attendance - we will be advocating this again in the future.
  3. Stakeholder participation: Actively involving stakeholders in workshops, for example by encouraging them to create their own visualisations on A1 poster sized sheets paper,… worked very well It kept the stakeholders engaged, created a collaborative environment and also acted as an ice breaker.

 

We have also learned that our stakeholder engagement composite methodology is transferable to other situations, not just course data; it has been re-used elsewhere within the University with positive results (http://cdata-project.com/2012/11/15/apprecihative-inquiry-strikes-again/). Furthermore, we received feedback from one of the Quality & Standards Officers at Brunel who was involved in workshop data collection: “We received lots of really positive feedback around the exam board workshops and lots of participants commented (positively!) on the innovative approach [ApprecHATive Inquiry] used. Given that the exam board topic can be quite prickly, people appreciated being given the opportunity to air their more negative comments whilst the session as a whole maintained a constructive character”…

 

Other lessons learned, include recognition that reaching agreement and collective buy-in for University owned processes, that cross multiple organisational boundaries, requires significant time.

 

Where change is required, stakeholders need to be given adequate time to understand the ‘issue’ (‘Define’ in Appreciative Inquiry terms), if they are to effectively contribute to the process’ enhancement (‘Design’ phase). Additionally, the team (in our implementation plan) underestimated how long it would take to ensure the proposed amendments to programme approval were taken through all relevant committees.

 

We have learned that using a project blog/website and Twitter feed are very effective tools for communication and reflection. Not only is it an excellent platform to keep the internal and wider communities up-to-date, but also an extremely beneficial tool to assist, in writing project reports for example, as everything is archived.

 

From experience over the lifetime of the project it is so important to version control documents. Furthermore, the common practice of backing up work is paramount. In the early days of specing the eVision facility in Microsoft Visio, we encountered corrupt files which could not be salvaged, meaning loss of work. 

 

Immediate Impact

This project has forced the focus on course data at Brunel University; regular Project Board meetings involving key stakeholders have allowed the team to maintain momentum, engraining the course data ideals into the thoughts of those involved. It is also important to note that there has been high level interest as the project board included, amongst others, two pro-vice chancellors at the University. Furthermore, the development of a new Approval in Principle (AiP) form, which was approved by Learning and Teaching Committee and Senate, has very much put data quality on the agenda.

 

Therefore, a culture of data quality now exists throughout key departments, where previously it perhaps only existed within highly specific administrative departments. The development of a specification for a Programme Management Facility means that automation and data integrity will be key components to future improvements in the course data arena.

 

In the context of staff, there is also now the wider understanding held around the University of how technology can support and benefit business processes and data collection; this was particularly evident during the ApprecHATive Inquiry workshops. This in turn has led to a positive change in attitudes towards the Programme Management facility (ProM).

 

It is also reasonable to say that attitudes towards data collection exercises were changed as an outcome of utilising the ApprecHATive Inquiry methodology. For example, to quote a stakeholder:

 

“There is, as with all group activities, the risk that an individual could dominate - I've seen that happen when there is a flip chart to fill in - but the Post-it’s allowed everyone the chance to have their say”

 

There has also been personal development – the Project Officer has learned a great deal about dissemination, ApprecHATive Inquiry, project governance, course data and XCRI-CAP.

 

Whilst the development and go-live of the Programme Management Facility is some time away, and the data quality and automation outcomes are therefore not going to be met immediately, stakeholders have been included in the entire journey of the development of the specification, and so feel as though their views and thoughts have been listened to.

 

Future Impact

The project has began to inform staff perceptions around digital collection of data and the benefits associated with the capture, retention and visualisation of electronic data. Brunel is committed to producing a suite of new facilities to manage the end-to-end processes associated with the University's programmes and their modules. Staff awareness, as a consequence of this project, is increasing of the enhancement opportunities available from moving to a full electronic workflow.

 

In terms of the XCRI-CAP process, it would impact student recruitment if course information is more easily available.

 

There will also be time savings and administrative efficiencies for approval and modification processes, this will significantly impact on Brunel staff.

 

To quote a colleague within the Quality & Standards department at Brunel: “I think the online AiP process [Programme Management Approval Facility] will definitely help us to track and record AiPs that are submitted by our Schools and I also think the academics in Schools will value the flexibility allowed by completing the AiP in soft copy”.

 

Conclusions

The project has been a valuable exercise in developing our understanding of the uses of course data within Brunel and externally. As a result, Brunel has a more sophisticated understanding of course data and how technology can support the capture, re-use, and reporting of the data.

 

Stakeholder engagement is absolutely paramount, a project cannot move forward without it. Also, it is important not to underestimate the impact of staffing changes to a project’s deliverables.

 

In terms of the wider community, the identification (due to the Course Data Programme) of similarities across the sector in programme approval processes may lead to more comparative sector-wide data. This could lead to easier and more informed decision making for applicants; further opening access to higher education.

 

The Jisc interim reports are an important tactic in helping to ensure effective project management as they provide milestones through the project lifecycle. Brunel intends to incorporate these half way evaluations into institutional projects going forward.

 

Jisc's focus on dissemination has helped to focus the project team on new and effective strategies to engage stakeholders internally and externally to Brunel.

 

 

Recommendations

General recommendations

Communication is paramount. Establishing a web presence through a project website, blog and Twitter feed not only keeps stakeholders and interested parties (internally and externally) up to date with the project, but they also act as excellent reflective tools. Particularly blog postings and tweets are ideal for this, as such mediums snapshot points in a project; enhancing evaluation.

 

Recommendations for the wider community

  • Spend time identifying stakeholders, select appropriate methodologies for getting the most out of a project, ensure teams who will be carrying out technical development work are given appropriate time to plan.
  • It is important not underestimating the benefit of planning (defining the scope of your project and realistic timelines).
  • If you are assigned a mentor, make use of their expertise, because their role of providing advice and support is very beneficial.

Recommendations for Jisc

  • The language used by Jisc can be very technical/specific, which can be intimidating. Never under-estimate the layman’s understanding of such terms.
  • Please be as specific as possible – down to the minutiae. Also, it may be useful to provide a glossary of terms, as some of the language used is very technical, and often those working within the project teams do not have prior knowledge of these.
  • The exercise of creating posters/videos for the Jisc ‘Show & Tell’ event was a particularly worthwhile activity and we believe that future projects could benefit from similar activities at the beginning of any project as it would help the project team determine the scope of the project.

 

 

Further details:

Project Director: Helen Emerson

Project Manager: Paal Elgvad

Contact email: paal.elgvad@brunel.ac.uk

Project Web URL: www.cdata-project.com