Learning & Teaching

Services

CURRICULUM REVIEW: A GUIDANCE NOTE

1. Purpose
There are numerous processes that involve review of programmes of study and their
curricula and nomenclature for the various reviews can vary. This guidance aims to describe
Curriculum Review, an ad hoc process undertaken in response to a driver indicating that
there may be issues with aspects of the quality of the current programme. It identifies
potential drivers along with the range of activities that might constitute a review.

2. Initiating a Curriculum Review

Many departments have curriculum review embedded into their culture, while others
undertake a review to deal with a current issue. A curriculum review would typically be
initiated by a Department in response to indicators arising from more cyclical processes such
as portfolio review, annual reflection or periodic review (see appendix 1 for comparisons of
different review types), or poor results in evaluative data such as student satisfaction
surveys. Faculties may identify a need for a curriculum review and can also ask a
Department to undertake one. Indicators that might trigger a review include:
a) Issues in recruitment to programmes, or failure to recruit as well as key UK
competitors, e.g. high post-offer decliner rates where curriculum coverage is cited as
a key deciding factor;
b) Indications in module, level and programme evaluation responses from current
students;
c) Responses to recommendations and requirements established by professional
statutory and regulatory bodies;
d) The changing nature of the discipline and a recognition of the need to refresh the
syllabus in the light of research and other developments in the field;
e) Graduate employment rates and the needs of graduate employers;
f) Analysis of programme information (KIS data) and other key indicators, including
trends in National Student Survey outcomes;
g) Recommendations arising from internal University review activities;
h) Response to changing strategic priorities (Department/Faculty/University).

The above list is not exhaustive, but provides a broad guide to the likely impetus for review.

On identifying the potential need for a curriculum review departments may want to collect
additional evidence to identify the lines of enquiry required to help decide on the scale of
review and the expected outcomes of a curriculum review.

3. Scale of Curriculum Review

Initial analysis will help a department to determine the scope of a review and who should be
involved with it. The involvement of external panel members with subject expertise and
peers from other areas of the University should be considered along with key staff from the

1
department. Good practice would involve some initial reflection between the department
and faculty to identify areas for the review to focus on, number of meetings required and a
steer for reporting requirements.

Reviews may cover one or more of the following areas:

The syllabus content of the programme and the balance between core subject, skills
development and interdisciplinary options
The structure of the programme including the volume of choice
The types and range of types of learning, teaching and assessment
Opportunities for study outside the classroom
Co-curricular opportunities
Requirements of Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies
National and international trends in the subject area.

The areas to be covered and who to involve will vary depending on the issues the review is
addressing and the desired outcomes. Departments will need to consider the resources
needed to collate and analyse supporting information and the questions to be addressed in
their lines of enquiry. Examples of documents that might inform a curriculum review are
given in appendix 3 and examples of the types of questions a review might cover are given
in appendix 4. Learning and Teaching Development Managers in LeTS and Faculty
Directors of Learning and Teaching can act as critical friends in helping departments to
design their review and identify the desired outcomes. Good practice would find the
outcomes of the review being incorporated into the Planning round.

4. Who does what in a Curriculum Review

Responsibility for curriculum review resides with departments. The Department defines the
scope and remit of the Curriculum Review, determines how many meetings are required and
when these will be. This will usually be in consultation with the Faculty learning and teaching
team. The department also produces any minutes or reports including any to the faculty. It
is the responsibility of the department to organise the external panel members and provide
all necessary information to them and the rest of panel, whether via a google site or other
means. The departments also hosts and sets up the meetings.

It is beneficial to have an independent chair for a review. This could be the Faculty Director
of Learning and Teaching, or another Faculty Officer, or a senior academic from another
Department.

The department should involve others in the process to ensure that it is challenging and
helps them to explore possibilities that they may not have considered. This could include
staff from other Departments or professional services (e.g.Careers, Corporate Affairs, CICS,
Library, Recruitment, Sheffield International, etc.) and recent Alumni, as well as external
colleagues. LeTS can also provide support if required in a number of different areas (see
appendix 2). Some faculties may also provide additional support including funding for
external contributors, catering and data collection.
Appendix 1

Comparison of Key Characteristics of Different Types of

Programme/ Department Review Processes
Curriculum Portfolio Periodic Annual
Review Review Review & Reflection
Policy &
Guidance
Review
Primary LeTS Recruitment LeTS LeTS
Professional Support Team
Services
Support
Initiated Department/ SRAIR University via University via
by School/ Faculty LeTS LeTS
Timing Rapid response TBC Approximately Annual
to triggers. five/six yearly
Key Focus Interventions Shape and Strategies for Review of
arising from attractiveness delivering, provision
recommendations of the portfolio; monitoring and delivered
of major review Competitor evaluating during the last
processes, or analysis and effective year identifying
triggered by key market insight learning; Student actions for
indicators. to support support; quality improvement
portfolio management and good
development arrangements; practice.
and academic
recruitment. practice;
standards of
awards; learning
resources.
Scope This can vary and Where In depth review All of the
may focus on one recruitment of all the Departments
particular aspect indicators Departments provision but
of the curriculum identify issues provision focus on areas
or look holistically a more in identifying long for
at the curriculum, depth analysis term strategic improvement
for a single is undertaken actions. and best
programme or to identify practice to
group of areas and share.
programmes potential
causes
Appendix 2
Possible Areas of LeTS Support for Curriculum Review
Aspect
Educational Development Advice
Networking with practitioners
Act as critical friend
Professional development support for
academic staff development
Best practice guidance
Procedural and regulatory guidance,
including programme structures and
records systems
Nature of Support Offered
Assistance with assessment of evidence, definition of
issues and formulation of desired outcomes Learning
and Teaching Development Managers
Find an expert (for issues such as feedback on
assessment, evaluation of programmes, novel
assessment techniques and development of learning
technologies and flexible delivery support)
Learning and Teaching Development Managers can
ask questions to help departments identify the desired
outcomes and lines of enquiry
Potential inputs including both standard and tailored
provision from:
Professional Development Team
Learning and Teaching Development Managers
team
Learning and Teaching Development Managers and
Quality Management Advisers.
Learning and Teaching Toolkit
Quality Management Adviser support and guidance.
Appendix 3

Indicative list of the types of documentation that Departments

could use to inform a review

Programme Specifications LeTS

Programme Regulations LeTS
The University's L&T strategy LeTS
UG Handbook(s) Department
Details of any planned changes or revisions to Department
programmes for the coming session
Departmental L&T strategy Department
Departmental TQA data - a summary of the main points Department
Departmental Undergraduate Proposition statement Department
Departmental Employability Strategy Department
Benchmarking data on the subject competitors SRAIR/ Department
Recruitment characteristics (where are students coming SRAIR/ Department
from?)
KIS data from competitors Department
see http://unistats.direct.gov.uk/find-out-more/key-
information-set
Programme information for the programmes of the key Department
competitors1
Programme mapping overview document 2 Department
External examiner reports LeTS
Student retention data MI View and Department
Widening participation data MI View and Department
Student achievement levels MI View and Department

1
Programme information should be available on all university websites
2
This would show how the programmes fit together, highlighting key modules that are common to
more than one programme, (and where programmes become distinctive); also showing the various
possible pathways through each programme, and possibilities for transfer across courses for
students.
Appendix 4

Sample questions that could be used in a curriculum review

(note these questions can be tailored depending on whether the review is of all
programmes offered by the department or a sub-set of programmes)

Questions About the Current Programmes

1. Do our degree programmes meet the subject benchmarks?
2. Do our degree programmes operate in a manner commensurate with our Learning and
Teaching mission statement and current strategy for enhancement?
3. Are there any aspects of the respective disciplines covered by our degree programmes
which are either over or under-represented within our curricula?
4. What are the overall strengths and weaknesses of our curricula, and are there any
aspects which might be improved?
5. Have there been any changes in the curriculum content of our subject area nationally or
internationally in the last 5 years?

Questions About The Potential Future Programmes

1. How might we make our curriculum more robust in the face of on-going and future
changes to the sector?
2. How can we ensure provision of appropriate fieldwork/ laboratory/ language/ skills
within our degree programmes whilst also maintaining equitable, cost-effective delivery?
3. How can we better embed/integrate employability into our programmes?
4. How can we further-improve the international dimensions of our curriculum?