PREDICT Project Plan 25th September 09

Project Acronym: PREDICT
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
Date: 25 September 2009
Project Document Cover Sheet
Project Information
Project Acronym PREDICT
Project Title Promoting Realistic Engaging Discussions In Curriculum Teams
Start Date September 2008 End Date August 2012
Lead Institution City University London
Project Director Dr Susannah Quinsee
Project Manager & Dr Pam Parker Associate Director Learning Development Centre
contact details 020 7040 3047 P.M.Parker@city.ac.uk
Partner Institutions N/A
Project Web URL http://www.city.ac.uk/ldc/resources/jisc.html
Programme Name (and Institutional Approaches to Curriculum Design
number)
Programme Manager Sarah Knight
Document Name
Document Title Project Plan
Reporting Period N/A
Author(s) & project role Dr Pam Parker Project Manager
th
Date 25 September 2009 Filename JISC Project Plan Version 4
URL if document is posted on project web site
Access  √ Project and JISC internal  General dissemination
Document History
Version Date Comments
th
4 25 September Updated following some institutional changes and the
2009 completion of the Undergraduate review which impact on the
project plan in terms of focus, objectives and dates
Document Sign off from Project Board

Version Date Signature of Chair of the Project Board
4
Page 1 of 31
Document title: JISC Project Plan
Last updated: April 2007
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
JISC Project Plan

Overview of Project
1. Background
When the original bid was submitted one objective of the new University strategy was a mandate to
reassess all undergraduate programmes in the next two years. The goal of this exercise was to
improve alignment with the University strategy and the revised learning and teaching strategy. The
reassessment of all undergraduate programmes would: a) ensure programmes meet the needs of the
market (both students and employers), b) ensure programmes are “fit for purpose, and c) core
qualities common to all curricula would be identified. On completion of this task all postgraduate
programmes will be also be reviewed.
A particular challenge for this exercise is that traditional curriculum design is aligned to disciplinary
boundaries, while we expect to move to a curriculum that has some interdisciplinary aspects. This
approach reflects the University strategy and is predicated on the growing consensus that
interdisciplinary working is necessary to tackle problems that are complex, multidimensional, and
open ended. To address this we must develop a new curriculum design process that is not aligned to
such boundaries and one where there is a clear educational and operational approach. The design
process must naturally foster interdisciplinary design and offer agility in ongoing curriculum
adjustments to meet changing external and internal influences of our diverse stakeholders – whether
learners, staff or employers.
The University learning and teaching strategy instigated a review of both the programme approval and
review processes to support enhanced educational development. This, therefore impacts on the
current curricula design process. It focuses on the need for processes that are developmental
throughout the programme lifespan enabling development and preparation for approval and where
required amendment with a clear emphasis on delivery and the learning experience.
We recognise that technology will allow us to support this process through exploitation of our
Business Process Management (BPM) capabilities that are available as part of our Service Oriented
Architecture (SOA) for IT provision. Technology will also support this in terms of educational tools that
can be used to develop the curriculum and learning and teaching materials. PREDICT will focus on
curriculum design for modules and programmes with an emphasis on educational development and
the student experience rather than the process of approval. The process will be based on principles,
values and models that reflect the stakeholders who are involved as well as those of the institution.
This project will build upon work in a range of areas that link to this project.
The undergraduate review is now completed and has led to a number of recommendations
with both short and long term goals.
We have a three year e-portfolio and Personal Development Planning (PDP) project to
develop learner defined curricula and embed key skills and attributes within all programme
areas, enabling lifelong learning opportunities and to create learners who are adaptive
workers
We have developed an in-house management system for programme and module
specifications called PRISM. There will be a review of how developments may impact on this
and how it can be used to enhance the information maintained about programmes.
The Periodic Review Process has been revised with a greater focus on educational
development and learning experiences and this is ready to implement from September 2009.
Page 2 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
We have undertaken a review of all our strategic learning software, including our virtual
learning environment, to ensure that it meets the needs of our staff and students and to
migrate to a flexible learning system that is at the core of our educational offering
2. Aims and Objectives

Aim
The development of a new curriculum design process that is efficient, flexible, focuses on enhancing
educational development and the student experience and, is supported with responsive technology to
accommodate our curriculum models
Objectives
The main objectives of the project are:
By August 2009
To identify our key stakeholders for different stages of the project
To define City University London’s use of the term curriculum design process and what this
incorporates
To analyse the current curriculum design process to identify both factors that enable and
inhibit curriculum design including interdisciplinary design
To assess our existing technology support for curriculum design and the factors that would
enable and support a new process that integrates activities for periodic programme review
and identify where gaps exist
To acquire any additional technology that is needed to support the curriculum design process
To examine module and programme specifications produced through using PRISM and
identify good practice and areas for development
To examine the revised Periodic Review Process for opportunities for curriculum re-design
To share all information between other undergraduate programmes reviews in the University
so that there is some synergy between them
To examine the data collected for the undergraduate review to provide baseline data for this
project and to avoid duplication of data collection
Examine the undergraduate review recommendations for short term and long term actions
and the new process of periodic programme review for curriculum design implications
To develop a process for managing the change to the curriculum design process and the
implementation of the undergraduate review recommendations
To review the project plan against the undergraduate review recommendations and ensure
that the project supports and compliments these being implemented
To disseminate the lessons learnt and good practice to our stakeholders, the JISC community
and beyond
By August 2010
To identify the project management boards expectations of the project and any activities
boards members are involved in
To develop a plan for the ongoing evaluation of the project throughout its progress and the
process of change
To develop a stakeholder map that outlines the levels of engagement they have with the
project and the appropriate forms of providing information to these stakeholders.
To identify which programmes and Schools will be involved in the pilots for this year from the
undergraduate review recommendation implementation plan, the Strategic Learning
Environment pilot plans and the Enhancing Learning Projects
To collect data from stakeholders involved in the pilots about their view of curriculum design,
their principles and values underpinning this and their development and support needs
To research what other institutions are doing in relation to curriculum design including
interdisciplinary design and tools to support curriculum design
Page 3 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
To research other models of curriculum design that are available in the literature and assess
their potential for us
To develop a new curriculum design process that can be used across the institution with
some adaptation from the stakeholder data collected
To review the approval process and the links with stages of the curriculum design process
To explore the current content and format of the module and programme specifications to
meet future needs of stakeholders
To link data and actions from the implementation of the undergraduate review
recommendations to the curriculum design process
To evaluate the pilots through workshops with all stakeholders and outline positive aspects
and areas that might need reviewing
To examine any feedback from the new periodic review process that might impact on the
curriculum design process and share any data that may be collected related to the actual
approval process with the Academic Development Unit
To disseminate lessons learnt and good practice to our stakeholders, the JISC community
and beyond
By August 2011
To modify the curriculum design process as needed and re-pilot with programmes and
Schools who have not yet been involved with the revised curriculum design process
To develop case studies from the stakeholder experiences sharing good practice from the
curriculum design process and review the map of engagement to see if this needs updating
To develop principles and tools such as templates to aid staff involved in curriculum design
To review the evaluation and disseminate data of the curriculum design and change process
across the University
By August 2012
To review the stakeholder map to ensure appropriate engagement has been achieved in all
areas and develop a plan to manage any gaps that have been identified
To evaluate the project and the outcomes of this with employer and graduate feedback as
well as all other stakeholders and use this to compliment the continuous evaluation that has
been ongoing
To disseminate any further evaluation data and curriculum design activities
3. Overall Approach
The project has four main activities:
1. Discovery and planning which will consist of a review of the current curriculum
design process, analysis of the data collected from the undergraduate review and
others sources of information such as the module and programme specifications
and, an evaluation of the current technology to support both curriculum design and
learning and teaching activities. In addition data will also be available to this project
from the e-portfolio and PDP projects and the evaluation and review of the Virtual
learning environment. All this data will be used to develop the plan for project and an
outline of the curriculum design process that might be used initially. Further data will
be collected from stakeholders who are involved in the curriculum design process as
pilots as well as from the evaluation of the current curriculum design processes used
both within other institutions but also those available through published materials.
2. Process of engaging discussions with curriculum teams to continue to collect
data as the curriculum design process is used and stakeholders share their
experiences. In addition the revised periodic review process will have been
implemented and further data related to curriculum design may be collected from
this. This will enable the curriculum design process to be revised as its use becomes
more widespread. This will also enable the scope of change to be mapped and any
possible risk that has not been identified to be defined.
Page 4 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
3. Evaluation and revision which will consist of using the ongoing evaluating data
from the curriculum design process and the process of change to refine and further
develop the process. This activity and that of the process of emergent design
interactions by their nature overlap. An essential principle of this process is that of
developing case studies and sharing good practice and lessons learnt not just within
the institution but with the wider community. It is envisaged that all Schools will have
programmes that need some curriculum design activity due to the undergraduate
review recommendations, by the end of August 2011.
4. Monitor and review which will consist of ensuring any remaining changes to the
curriculum design process can be made and the principles and templates that have
been developed can be reviewed. In addition a full analysis of the project will be
completed.
PREDICT will focus on the undergraduate curriculum and not the postgraduate curriculum however
lessons learnt and good practice that are transferable to the postgraduate curricula will be
documented and a plan for any changes will be developed.
Critical success factors for the project include a process for curriculum design that facilitates
educational development, interdisciplinary collaboration, which is supported by technology to enhance
the process from the beginning, that is responsive and agile and, a process that all is owned by the
stakeholders.
4. Project Outputs
The project outputs will include:
Six monthly progress reports on the project and the final report
Evaluation reports produced six monthly
An analysis and evaluation of the curriculum design process and identification of principles
and values that underpin the process
Case studies related to stakeholder engagement and communication
Case studies from the pilots of the process will be developed from each of the Schools
involved. Three case studies will be aimed for in the first year of the pilots with a further four
to follow so all Schools are represented. These will use combination of written studies, audio
and video and should encompass views from those who design and teach the programmes,
and where appropriate employers and professional body stakeholder views.
Tips and guidance for curriculum design
Workshops on curriculum design, the technology to support this and to develop learning and
teaching materials as part of the process
A range of conference presentations and publications about the project and outcomes
Guidance will be developed for practitioners and staff involved in programme design in terms
of engaging in the process in a developmental manner and for stakeholders such as
employers and professional bodies on their role in the curriculum design process
5. Project Outcomes
The PREDICT project will lead to an enhanced curriculum design process supported by technology
for all programmes with a focus on educational development and the learning experience. In addition
those wishing to develop interdisciplinary programmes will have practical guidance which will impact
upon learning and teaching and the student experience by facilitating work on collaborative
programmes that are at present often disjointed. This should enable more collaboration and provide
increased opportunities to evaluate and research learning and teaching of this nature. The technology
being integral to the process should also facilitate lecturers who are developing programmes to spend
more time on the actual programme development and reduce the process time which will promote
and support innovation. Technological support for the process will enable a more flexible, innovative
and responsive approach.
Page 5 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
Through the evaluative approach identified in project plan it is intended that curriculum models that
can be adapted to a range of professions will be identified and evaluated for their value in the
process.
The institution has a key objective to reassess all undergraduate programmes and implement
recommendations to enhance these. This project will support this implementation whilst also
developing a curriculum design process that focuses on educational development, enhancing the
learning experience, supporting interdisciplinary programmes and enabling a more responsive
approach to programme design. The new design process will be incorporated into the usual University
processes once the evaluation data has been collected and analysed.
The project will enable both case studies and guidance materials to be developed which can be used
by others within the JISC community and beyond. Through the dissemination of stages of this project
at conferences and through publications in journals others within the JISC community and beyond will
be able to gain information about lessons learnt and good practice.
6. Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder Interest / stake Importance
Students Students will be involved in the new design process which will lead to HIGH
current and improved learning opportunities, information about programmes and
alumni ensure we are better able to prepare students for employment in a
range of settings.
Students will be involved in range of ways but these will be discussed

with Schools so that they are appropriate to current student
engagement approaches.
Both alumni and current student views will be sort in terms of their
involvement in programme design and the information they have
access to prior to their commencement on the programmes and during
their programme
University We need to work with staff to identify what their views of curriculum HIGH
staff, both design are and to gain information about if they think improvements to
academic the processes could be made. We need to find out how they believe
and support they should be involved in the design process and what support they
would need. There are a range of approaches that could be used to
gain this information:
There is a module for staff within the MA Academic Practice

Programme that focuses on curriculum development and evaluation.
As part of the module staff could work on exploring the current design
process and examining other approaches that could be used. They
could cascade information about the JISC project to their colleagues
and on completion of the module they could be asked to be an “expert
reference group” who could provide feedback on plans and changes as
the project progresses. This module runs annually and so at least three
groups will be developed during the project.
We will ask staff their views on the process and their role when they
have been involved in curriculum design through both a focus group
approach and a questionnaire.
We also hold an annual learning and teaching conference which will be

used as an opportunity to share the project with staff and collect their
views on the curriculum design process
Page 6 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th

Senior This project relates to some of the strategic imperatives of the HIGH
managers University which include facilitating an educational development
approach to designing programmes, enhanced opportunity for
interdisciplinary programmes, reviewing the process to be more
responsive and a clearer focus on the learning experience.
Senior managers will be asked via individual meetings with them what
they would like the project to deliver in terms of output.
Senior management will be key advocates for the work of the project
as well as ensuring that the project delivers. The project team will
report to internal senior management events to ensure dissemination
across the University and to ensure the project maintains a high profile
across the University.
Project There are other reviews being undertaken across the University which HIGH
Managers overlap with some aspects of the project and so in order to ensure that
no repetition occurs and that information is shared other project
managers will be provided with regular updates on this project.
In addition members of the PREDICT project team are members of the

other projects management meetings.
Project The project board members are essential to the progress and HIGH
Board evaluation of this project and in raising the profile of the project within
Members the Institution and beyond.
All members of the project board will met with individually to discuss
the project, their vision of the project and outcomes and their role in
enabling the project to be successful.
In addition all minutes from the project board will be a record of the
development of the project
Employers It is important to involve employers and professional bodies in the HIGH
and project to ask them what knowledge and skills they would like the
Professional graduates to have on completion of their programme but also how they
Bodies would like to be involved in the process of curriculum design and
approval.
This will be achieved through using a Delphi study technique to those

who have links with the University programmes. In addition those
involved in the approval process throughout this project will be asked
about their experiences and positive aspects as well as those that
could be reviewed through a questionnaire.
Teaching Representatives from the union will be asked to provide view of the MEDIUM
Union Reps curriculum design and how they would like to be involved in the project.
The representatives will be able to provide a view of concerns that staff

may have raised with them about curriculum design as well as having
some suggestions about changes through discussion with staff at the
University as well as their contact with those in other HE institutions.
This will be achieved through regular meetings with them at key stages
of the project such as when plans for the new design process are
drafted to collect baseline data on the current process and proposed
changes and then six monthly to provide an update on the project and
gain feedback from them
Page 7 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th

Higher Other institutions will be able to share they experiences of similar MEDIUM
Educational initiatives as well as learning from ours. There will be an opportunity to
Institutions share lessons learnt as well as solutions or suggestions for changes
and any proposed models that are developed.
This will be achieved through contact with the other design projects
and through dissemination at conferences.
HEA Staff from the Academy and members of subject centres will be MEDIUM
Academy interested in the key findings of the project, any models developed and
and case studies focused on specific programmes. This will provide
associated additional opportunities for dissemination as well as sharing practice
Subject across the sector.
Centres
Links will be made with the University HEA link and through key
subject centre links for the Schools and disciplines at City University.
JISC Project JISC as funders of some of the project will want to know that the HIGH
management project is keeping to its plan and is meeting targets in terms of time and
Team finance.
The project team will also want to know about the lessons learnt during
the project both in terms of the actual project and it outcomes but also
in relation to the project process.
JISC Project Other JISC project teams will be kept informed of progress but also MEDIUM
community any information that is relevant to the community as lessons learnt and
models that may have been developed as well as any innovative
approaches to involving stakeholders.
7. Risk Analysis
The risks in this plan will be reviewed every six months when the interim reports are being prepared
and any changes will be highlighted with appropriate amendments to this plan.
Risk Probability Severity Score Action to Prevent/Manage Risk

(1-5) (1-5) (P x S)
Key staff involved in the 1 2 2 Any key individual would be
project leaving replaced with a similarly skilled and
experienced person and where
possible this will be planned ahead
Staff adapt the processes of 2 2 4 Ensure as many staff as possible
curriculum design and the have a voice in the project and are
policies or use processes able to provide information about
outside of those specified their needs
Staff being sceptical about 3 2 5 Ensure staff are able to discuss
the technology to support their requirements for technology
curriculum design given support. Pilot technology at early
existing experiences stages and publish successes and
lessons learnt openly
Organisational 1 2 2 Whilst School priorities might
Changes in School change this initiative is central to
commitment future activities and so ensuring
School staff are engaged with the
project should prevent this
Page 8 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
Risk Probability Severity Score Action to Prevent/Manage Risk

(1-5) (1-5) (P x S)
Technical 2 3 6 Additional technologies will be
Current technologies cannot purchased to support the project
support the process
There is a change either in 1 3 4 At present most of the key senior
a key member of the senior management staff have been
management of the appointed within the last two years
university or in the strategic and so the University strategy has
direction of the University been revised to look to the next five
years and is not due for a major
strategic review. The Project team
however has a key member of the
senior management as its
executive and will maintain a clear
vision of the University strategy.
However if there are indications

that a key senior member of staff is
leaving, a change of policy or
strategy is likely to be introduced
the risk to the project would be
assessed and consideration given
to how the change may lead to
amended plans for the project or
the change may in fact enhance
the success and benefit of the
project.
Wider Community of HEI’s 2 2 4 Information from our project will be

not sharing their experience shared within the community and
in this area we will seek information in a
collaborative manner
Employers and professional 2 2 4 Provide information about how this
bodies not engaging with will impact on the graduates they
the project employ
Students not engaging with 2 3 6 Provide information about how this
the project might enhance their experience
and that of other students
Other reviews of the 1 2 2 Ensure that the project board has
undergraduate curriculum members from any other review
not linking to this project taking place
Other review deadlines 3 2 5 Other review deadlines are
change and cause a delay monitored and as soon as there is
in the plans an indication of a delay this will be
discussed the PREDICT plan
reviewed and JISC informed of any
changes
Scope and scale of the 2 2 4 Monitor all stages of the project
project larger than first and restructure plans in
estimated consultation with JISC
Page 9 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
8. Standards
Name of standard or Version Notes

specification
BPMN 1.1 Business Process Modeling Notation – used to model
business processes. See http://www.bpmn.org/
BPEL 2.0 Business Process Execution Language - used to
make busness processes runnable. See
http://www.oasis-
open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsb
pel
9. Technical Development
City University has adopted IBM’s WebSphere family of products as its strategic solution for SOA.
The core components of this stack includes: -
a) City University Middleware stack which includes

a. Modeler Publishing edition which allows a Business Analysts to model processes,
define KPI’s, run simulations and collaborate with business users via a web interface
b. WebSphere Integration Developer which is used to take the output from Modeler and
create a run time version of the process.
c. Rational Application Developer which is used to develop core services.
d. WebSphere Process Server which is the run-time engine.
e. WebSphere Advanced ESB which provides integration capability with our core
enterprise systems
f. WebSphere SAP Adaptor which provides integration from our Advanced ESB to SAP
g. Business Monitor
i. Allows us to view status business processes
ii. Allows us to feed metrics back to Modeler
iii. Dashboard and reporting capability
iv. Push to Blackberry
v. Can integrate with corporate monitoring tools
vi. User alerts based on KPI thresholds
h. WebSphere Portal which manages the user experience
i. Microsoft Active Directory which provides user authentication.
b) City University Core Enterprise Systems which include: -
a. Student Records System which is the SITS product from Tribal. This product runs on
an Oracle 10g database. Integration with this product is achieved via our middleware
using the new Stu-Talk product.
b. CitySpace which is our core Virtual Learning Environment and is based on the
WebCT product. Integration is via their published API which is based on IMS.
c. SAP which is our core finance system. Integration is via the WebSphere SAP
adaptor.
d. PRISM which currently manages our programme and module specifications. It is a
custom built web application developed in Java and deployed to WebSphere
Application Server.
e. Millennium which manages our student library.
After an extensive review of the VLE market, City has decided to port their current CitySpace
environment to the open source Moodle product which will happen over the lifetime of the PREDICT
project. The open nature of Moodle allows us to investigate further the integration of the VLE and this
may open challenges in area of Curriculum design particularly in the area of Assessments.
Page 10 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
In addition to this we may consider new Web 2.0 collaborative tools to enhance the user experience
during the process. These would be delivered via the portal. The products include: -
a) Lotus Connections which provides personal profiles, wikis, blogs, personal document library,
activities and supports the concept of social communities.
b) Lotus QuickR which provides a team collaboration capability including Blogs, Wikis,
Document Libraries, Activities and Calendaring
c) Lotus Sametime provides presence awareness, instant messaging and web conferencing
capability.
During the course of this project City will be implementing a replacement VLE. Costs and resources to
provide integration with that system will be built in as part of that project.
IBM has a dedicated web site called DeveloperWorks to support developers in best practises for this
technology. Details on the BPM tools can be found at: -
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/bpm/
10. Intellectual Property Rights

Any material developed by the institution during the project will be the Intellectual Property of the City
University London. Where required any third party permission will be sought.
All the project deliverables, reports and other relevant outputs will be published via the project website
and made freely available to the academic community. Where appropriate, materials will be offered
to relevant repositories (including JORUM and CloudWorks) to support wider dissemination and
sustainable access.
Project Resources
11. Project Partners
There are no project partners involved in PREDICT.
12. Project Management

City University London follows the PRINCE2 project management methodology. Therefore, the
constitution of the project board and team has been articulated in relation to PRINCE2 roles.
Name Role Allocation of Contact Details

Time
Professor David Bolton, Project Executive Two days per D.J.Bolton@city.ac.uk
Deputy Vice Chancellor Education. month 020 7040 8443
Dr Pam Parker, Project Manager 0.4 FTE P.M.Parker@city.ac.uk
Associate Director, Learning 020 7040 3047
Development Centre
Dr Susannah Quinsee, Project Director 0.2 FTE S.Quinsee@city.ac.uk
Director of Learning Development 020 7040 0215
Susannah Marsden, Senior Supplier 0.3 FTE S.Marsden@city.ac.uk
Head of the Academic Development 020 7040 8015
Unit
Megan Palmer Senior Supplier Megan.Palmer.1@city.ac.
Deputy Head of the Academic uk
Development Unit 020 7040 8323
Page 11 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
Name Role Allocation of Contact Details

Time
Helen Emerson, Senior Supplier 0.4 FTE H.Emerson@city.ac.uk
Academic and Professional Process 020 7040 8323
and Support Director,.
This role is waiting for new Project Assurance Two days per K.Wilkinson-1@city.ac.uk
appointment following a member of month 020 7040 4097
staff leaving
John Gallagher, Application Two days per John.Gallagher-
Information Architect Architect month 1@city.ac.uk
07976 069882
Roberta Williams, Senior User Two days per R.Williams@city.ac.uk
Associate Dean Learning and month 020 7040 8295
Teaching School Community
And Health Sciences (SCHS).
Additional School members to be Senior User
determined once pilots identified
Sally Bradley External Member S.A.Bradley@shu.ac.uk
Senior Lecturer in Curriculum and
Professional Development Learning
and Teaching Institute Sheffield
Hallam University
The project board Terms of Reference are:
The Project Board is responsible for the overall direction and management of the project and has
responsibility and authority for the project.
1 Approve the project plan and any changes that may be required to this during the life of
the project.
2 Agree the role and responsibilities of members of the project team
3 Approve any project reports and budget updates
4 Approve identification of any risks and actions outlined to reduce / remove risks
5 Ensure that any resources required for the project are available
6 Provide overall guidance and direction to the project, ensuring it remains within any
specified constraints
7 Approve any outputs of the project including lessons learnt, recommendations and plans
for closure of the project
8 Responsibility for the evaluation activities of the project, monitoring these and receiving
reports on progress to date and approving further action where required
The project is to meet the minimum of once per term with additional meetings as required to ensure
critical deadlines for actions and submission of reports are met.
13. Programme Support

There are dates provided by JISC for workshops on methodology and evaluation and it is felt at
present that this will provide sufficient support. However if any additional needs are identified they will
be discussed with the JISC team.
Page 12 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
14. Budget
This budget reflects the revised one sent to JISC following confirmation of Bid being granted. See
appendix A. (This is not available in this copy)
Detailed Project Planning

15. Workpackages
See Appendix B
Page 13 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
16. Evaluation Plan

Timing Factor to Evaluate Questions to Address Method(s) Measure of Success Who will be Responsible
This section of the plan relates to the Discovery and planning phase and the learning objectives to be completed for August 2009
April The appropriateness of Will the plan enable the Review by project board The plan will encompass Project manager and
2009 project plan approaches for the project and programme manager all areas required for the director and the project
to achieve the aim? project management team
April Technological support What aspects of the Analysis of the process There is an outline of how Project manager and
2009 available for programme programme design and how data is collected technology currently application architect
design at present process are currently and maintained. supports the design
supported by technology? Analysis of aspects of the process
process that are
supported by technology
June The current programme Has the baseline data Analysis of the process The baseline data has Staff across the University
2009 design process is outlined captured the detail of the and discussion with staff captured correctly all and Project manager
and analysed and any current programme design across the University aspects of the current
benefits or issues that process as outlined in the programme design
might impact on a policy? process from the policy
responsive process or an Are there any benefits or and a list of any benefits
interdisciplinary issues with the current and issues
programme are identified process particularly in
terms of being responsive
and in supporting
interdisciplinary
programmes?
June A comprehensive list of Is the list of employers Analysis of the list and The list of employers and Staff across the University
2009 key employers and and professional bodies consultation with the staff professional bodies and Project manager
professional bodies involved in programme from across the University involved in the design
involved in programme design complete? process is complete
design is complete
Page 14 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
August All key stakeholders have Have all stakeholders Documentary analysis of All stakeholders are Project Manager, Project
2009 been identified been identified? School Curriculum design involved and believe they Director, Senior User
Are there any groups meetings, Interviews, can contribute to the Schools
missing? Questionnaires design process
August Current module and Do the module and Documentary analysis of Module and programme Project Manager
2009 programme specifications programme specifications module and programme specifications have been
demonstrate good provide clear and accurate specifications analysed and good
practice in terms of the detail about programmes? practice and areas to
information provided identify have been
outlined
August Data collected for the What data has been Documentary analysis of The data collected can be Project Manager and
2009 Undergraduate review is collected? the data and checking the used for the baseline Senior Supplier Academic
shared with the project What relevant information project plan for areas not report and areas missing Development Unit
manager for this project has been gained? covered can be identified
What gaps in the data
exist?
August All current reviews across How are all the other Discussion with key staff There is no overlap of Lead from other reviews
2009 the University that have reviews progressing? from other reviews work across the reviews and Project executive and
links with this project have Has data from the reviews and information is shared director and Senior
shared information been shared? enabling the reviews to supplier Academic
Are there lessons that can compliment and support Development Unit
be shared and each other
successes?
Is there any overlap of
effort?
Page 15 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
August The short and long term Which are the short term Review the The recommendations Project Manager and
2009 recommendations for the recommendations for Undergraduate review needing action within the Senior Supplier Academic
undergraduate review are implementation by report and list of next academic year Development Unit
published September 2010? recommendations (September 2010 –
Which are longer term August 2011) can be
recommendations? identified and those which
will be implemented after
this
August There is a clear process Is there a process for Discussion with peers in The rollout of the Project executive and
2009 for managing a change in managing change across schools, liaison with Curriculum design across director
the curriculum design the institution? senior management staff, the University is planned
process Are all schools included in discussion with union and all are aware of this
the plans for rolling out the representatives and the and support it
curriculum design drafting of a plan
process?
August Additional technology Has the additional Review of existing Additional technology has Project manager and
2009 required for the design technology that was technology and a list of been acquired application architect
process is acquired required been acquired? additional technology that
is required is developed
August The plan for the project is What issues need to be Discussions with Project The revised plan meets Project board members
2009 revised to take account of considered when revising Board members and the needs of the project
changes within the the plan? peers within the institution and expectations of the
institution and through the What needs to be and those from other board members
various reviews changed in the plan to projects
ensure this can now be
taken forward?
Page 16 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
This section of the plan relates to the Process of Engaging Discussions with Curriculum Teams and the learning objectives to be completed for
August 2010
Septem Outline the Project Board What do the Project Board Discussion with the board The project meets the Project Executive, Director
ber members expectations of members want the project members and examination board members and Manager
2009 the project and the to achieve? of the minutes from the expectations and activities
activities the project is to What specific activities do meetings that were expected from
achieve the board members the project have been
expect the project to undertaken
achieve?
October There are Which programmes will be Examination of the There are Project Executive and
2009 programmes/modules used for the pilots? undergraduate review programmes/modules Senior Supplier Academic
identified in all schools to Do the programmes for implementation plan, the identified for the Pilot Development Unit, Project
undertake the pilots the Pilot come from Moodle implementation ranging from all Schools Director, Senior User
across a range of plan, the programmes Schools and Project
schools? within the Senior User Manager
Schools area and from the
award scheme
October Stakeholder map of Are all the stakeholders Check the list of identified Stakeholders are Project Manager and
2009 engagement and included in the map? stakeholders, Consider appropriately engaged in Director and Senior User
communication What levels of their role in curriculum the project and Schools
engagement do the design and their likely communication with them
stakeholders have with engagement and how is effective
the project? would be the most
What communication appropriate method to
approaches are needed? communicate. Check this
map with some
stakeholders for current
accuracy
Page 17 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
Novemb Programme and module What information needs to Discussion with key staff The programme and Senior Suppliers
er 2009 specifications format and be included in the such as marketing, module specifications Academic Development
guidance for content are specification for students, student union and provide information Unit
outlined staff and workshops stakeholders require in an
employers/professional appropriate language
bodies?
How does the information
need to be provided in
terms of language?
Dec Principles and Values for What are the principles Workshops and Principles and Values for Students, staff across the
2009 the curriculum design are and values stakeholders discussions the curriculum design are University, project
outlined have about curriculum outlined executive, project director,
design? project manager
Dec Stakeholders views of What are the Questionnaire, Delphi There is a detailed Students, Staff,
2009 curriculum design as a stakeholders’ views of study, discussions and account of the process of professional bodies and
process are documented curriculum design? focus groups curriculum design from the employers and the Project
Do the stakeholders make stakeholders perspective manager
adaptations to aspects of which includes any
the process and why? deviations they make, any
What concerns and concerns they have and
successes do the any successes they
stakeholders identify outline
about the process?
Dec Definitions of key terms What do stakeholders Questionnaire, Delphi Definitions are developed Students, Staff,
2009 are developed mean when they discuss study, focus groups and for all key terms professional bodies and
curriculum design, documentary analysis employers and the Project
responsive and agile and manager, Senior supplier
principles and values? Academic Development
Unit
Page 18 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
Dec Other models of What models of Examining websites, Data is available related to Project manager
2009 curriculum development curriculum development Discussion with peers, other models and
are available for the are used across the sharing data from across processes that might meet
project team to consider sector? the design projects our needs
when redesigning the Do other models and
curriculum process processes promote
interdisciplinary
programmes more
effectively than ours?
How long do other
processes take?
Jan A range of curriculum What processes were Review which A range of processes Project manager, director,
2010 design processes have used? programmes were in the were piloted and aspects senior user process and
been used within the pilots Did they work? pilot and examine the of good practice and support and application
based upon programme How many programmes process they used through areas for development are architect Senior User
and School need and they were used in the pilot? documentary analysis and identified Schools and staff
have been evaluated discussion with the
stakeholders
July The links between the What information from the Sharing data between two There is a clear outline of Project manager and
2010 curriculum design process curriculum design is activities, workshops and what information is Senior Suppliers
and the approval process needed for approval? discussions needed for both Academic Development
has been identified How do these two processes and how these Unit
activities compliment each compliment each other
other?
July Data, plans and activities What activities from the Sharing data and There is a clear link Project manager, Senior
2010 from the Undergraduate undergraduate review workshops between the Suppliers Academic
review implementation have related to curriculum implementation of the Development Unit and
have been shared with design? undergraduate review senior User Schools
this project to provide Has this enabled the recommendations and the
further evaluation data recommendations of the curriculum design process
undergraduate review to and project
be implemented?
Page 19 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
This section of the plan relates to the Evaluation and Revision phase and the learning objectives to be completed for August 2011
February Data from pilots is Did the process work? Conference presentations, The data from the pilots is Staff and students from
2011 disseminated What lessons were learnt? journal articles, case disseminated and any Schools who undertook
What changes are needed studies of the pilots, change to the design the pilot and Project
prior to using this with discussion with peers, process are made manager and director and
another group of project website senior user from the
programmes? schools and application
architect
August Design process is ready to Have the suggested Analysis of programme The design process has Project executive, director
2011 be used across other changes been made? design documentation, been used all schools and manager and Senior
schools Are all Schools now able focus groups and User from the Schools
to use the process? questionnaire with
stakeholders from across
schools
August Review the revised Have the periodic reviews Analysis of periodic The curriculum design is Students, staff from
2011 periodic programme undertaken to date programme review reports supported by the revised schools, senior user
review to explore if there promoted curriculum and documentation, and periodic programme schools, project manager
are issues related to design as part of this discussions with staff review process and senior supplier
curriculum design as part process? involved in these academic development
of the process processes unit
August Principles and values Do all stakeholders Focus group discussions All stakeholders can Project Manager, Senior
2011 underpinning the identify with the principles with Stakeholders and outline the principles and User Schools
curriculum design process and values? analysis of documentation values underpinning
represent stakeholder Do all stakeholders know used throughout the curriculum design and
views about the principles and curriculum design process display ownership of these
values?
August Dissemination and Have findings been taken Data analysis, focus The process is Staff and students from
2011 integration of any data into account with each use groups, questionnaire, disseminated Schools, employers and
from the use of the of the process? discussion with peers, professional bodies,
process across all schools Have lessons been learnt conference presentations, Senior Management
been shared internally and journal articles, project Project manager and
across the wider sector? website director and Senior User
Schools
Page 20 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
This section of the plan relates to the Monitor and Review phase and the learning objectives to be completed for August 2012
August The new process is Did all stakeholders feel Questionnaire, focus All stakeholders think the Staff and students from
2012 successful the process met their groups, documentary new process is successful Schools, employers and
needs? analysis, discussion with professional bodies,
Was the change peers Senior Management
successfully introduced Project manager and
across all schools? director and Senior User
Schools
August There is dissemination of Have the outcomes from Case studies, guidance Project outcomes have Staff, Senior Managers,
2012 the project outcomes the project been shared materials, conference been disseminated Senior User Schools
across the sector? presentations, articles Project manager/Director
Page 21 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
17. Quality Plan
Output
Timing Quality QA method(s) Evidence of Quality Quality tools
criteria compliance responsibilities (if
applicable)
Ongoing Extent of Review of All stakeholders Project Board N/A
stakeholder activities and are included in
engagement documentation activities and
and input provide
information
Ongoing Good Internal Good practice Project Board N/A
practice and newsletters and and lessons
lessons seminars, learnt from
learnt are external use of PREDICT are
shared case studies, shared within the
conference institution and
presentations the wider
and articles community
June There is an Review the The outline for Project Board N/A
2009 outline of the information the future is
future needs collected and clearly articulated
for ensure all needs and all agree it is
curriculum are met fit for purpose
design
January Principles, Review data The principles, Project Board N/A
2010 Values and from pilots to values and
process used ensure all these process is fit for
in curriculum are included purpose across a
design by range of Schools
stakeholders
are outlined
from pilots
May 2010 The Review the Stakeholders Project Board N/A
evaluation of evaluation data state the
the pilots and consult the principles, values
refines the stakeholders and process
principles, represent their
values and views
process
further
July 2010 Programme Review Stakeholders Project Board N/A
and module evaluation data state the
specifications from programme and
contain stakeholders module
information in and from specifications
a stakeholder discussion with contain the
preferred stakeholders information they
format require
Page 22 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
Output
Timing Quality QA method(s) Evidence of Quality Quality tools
criteria compliance responsibilities (if
applicable)
August There is a Develop The new Project Board N/A
2011 plan for this procedures procedure is
to become known to all and
everyday is part of the
business normal business
June The project Review all The interim Project Board N/A
2012 was effective interim reports reports and final
in achieving and the final draft report
the aim draft report identifies the
overall aim has
been achieved
18. Dissemination Plan
Timing Dissemination Audience Purpose Key Message

Activity
Ongoing Institution website All stakeholders To provide Ensuring
and tools for updates on the stakeholder
communication project and engagement
enable
stakeholders to
ask questions and
share information
Ongoing Use of staff as an Peers within To share Sharing of
expert group from schools and the information with information within
the Curriculum project team peers and to the institution and
development and provide developing
evaluation module information to the ownership
project team and
develop
stakeholder
ownership
Ongoing Circle website Other project To share Sharing good
teams, JISC and information and practice
the wider provide updates
community on the project
Ongoing JISC Learning and JISC community To share good Sharing good
teaching expert practice and practice
group information about
the projects
Ongoing Workshops and Other JISC To share projects Sharing of good
meetings with JISC projects and lessons learnt practice
Once a Term Printed newsletter All stakeholders To provide update Ensuring
on project and stakeholder
summary of engagement and
progress maximise
dissemination
Page 23 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
Timing Dissemination Audience Purpose Key Message

Activity
Annually Workshops All stakeholders To ensure Ensuring
and wider HEI engagement by stakeholder
staff and stakeholders and engagement and
stakeholders to share good ownership and
practice but also maximise
for stakeholders dissemination
to develop some
ownership
through regular
contact and input
Annually Developing Case Wider HEI staff To share good Promoting
Studies and stakeholders practice and stakeholder
lessons learnt engagement and
from the ownership and
stakeholders Sharing good
perspective as practice
well as the project
team
Annually Conference papers Wider HEI staff To share good Promoting
and posters for and stakeholders practice and stakeholder
HEA, Technology lessons learnt engagement and
organisations and from the ownership and
Learning and stakeholders Sharing good
Teaching groups perspective as practice
well as the project
team
Annually Journal articles via Wider HEI staff To share good Promoting
curriculum and stakeholders practice and stakeholder
development and lessons learnt engagement and
learning and from the ownership and
teaching journals stakeholders Sharing good
perspective as practice
well as the project
team
Six Monthly Reports Project Board, To review the The project’s
Stakeholders and project’s progress review of keeping
JISC to the plan and
achieving the aim
Page 24 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
19. Exit and Sustainability Plans
Project Outputs Action for Take-up & Embedding Action for Exit
Reports To be published on Institution To evaluate the project and
website and JISC process and inform future such
projects
Case Studies To share lessons on the project and To share the outcomes of the
how the process was used both project so others might explore
internally and within the wider how these may be applied in
community their area
Curriculum development To become part of the University To embed the project outcomes
and approval process procedures by pilot studies, and the new approval process
evaluation, integration of evaluation
outcomes and redesign
Research and Scholarly To disseminate the project activities To inform future projects of this
outputs and methods nature both internal and
external and disseminate the
project outcomes
Project Outputs Why Sustainable Scenarios for Taking Issues to Address

Forward
Final Evaluation Vital evaluation data Review evaluation data for Feedback to all
following first cohort of effectiveness of any further changes that stakeholders
into employment programmes might be needed
Research and To include final Produce articles and To share final
Scholarly activity evaluation data conference papers and evaluation data
posters
Appendices
Appendix A. Project Budget (this has been removed)
Appendix B. Workpackages
Page 25 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
Appendix B
JISC WORK PACKAGE
Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
WORKPACKAGES S O N D Ja F M Ap My Ju Jy Au S O N D Ja F M Ap My Ju Jy Au
08 08 08 08 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 09 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
1: 1 2 12 4, 9 5
& & 6, &
11 3 7 10
&
8
2: 13 18 17 24 19
14 20
15 21
16 22
24 23
Month 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48
WORKPACKAGES S O N D Ja F M Ap My Ju Jy Au S O N D Ja F M Ap My Ju Jy Au
10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
3: 27 29 28 25 29 26
4: 32 31 30 32
32
Project start date: 01/09/08

Project completion date: 31/07/12
Duration: 48 months
Page 26 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
Milestone Responsibility
Work Package and Activities Earliest Latest Output (deliverables and reports in bold)
start date completion
date
YEAR 1
01/09/08 31/08/09
WORKPACKAGE 1:
Objective:
The objective for work package 1 is to undertake a
review of and, discover and plan for curriculum
design and identify aspects of good practice
1. Review original project plan and revise and 15/10/08 05/12/08 Draft project plan, work plan and Ongoing Pam Parker
expand for a draft project plan budget Completed
2. Collect data on all stakeholders involved in 01/12/08 31/01/09 A List of all stakeholders involved in Pam Parker
curriculum development and approval across the curriculum development and approval
institution and create a list Completed
3. Outline current processes of curriculum 01/12/08 31/01/09 Outline of curriculum development and Susannah
development and approval approval process Completed Marsden
4. Outline different modes for involving 01/02/09 30/06/09 Different modes of involving stakeholders Pam Parker
stakeholders in the project identified Completed
5. Link with key staff in other reviews that impact 01/01/09 Links are established with key staff in Ongoing David Bolton &
or overlap with this project other reviews to ensure findings and Susannah
activities are shared and compliment Quinsee
each other
6. Develop baseline data report on a range of areas 01/04/09 31/07/09 Baseline data report is produced and is Pam Parker
an ongoing record of activity Completed
7. Outline current technology support for 01/12/08 30/04/09 Outline of current technology support John Gallagher
curriculum development and identify any gaps ability and any gaps Completed
Page 27 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
date
8. Analyse the current programme and module 01/01/09 30/04/09 Programme and module specifications Pam Parker
specifications to identify the information they are analysed for details of the
provide and good practice information they contain and areas of
good practice Completed
9. Examine the data collected from the 01/05/09 31/07/09 The data collected has been analysed Pam Parker
undergraduate review for the baseline data and added to the baseline data report /Susannah
report and to avoid duplication of data collection where appropriate and a note of gaps in Marsden
during the project the data has been made for further data
collection Completed
10. Review the undergraduate reviews 31/07/09 31/08/09 A summary of all recommendations has Pam Parker
recommendations for short and long term actions been examined and those that can be
and those that will that can be focused upon for focused upon for the pilots have been
the curriculum design pilots identified Completed
11. Set up Project website at Institution 01/12/08 31/12/08 Website developed at institution Pam Parker
Completed
12. Submit final project plan 01/02/09 30/04/09 Final project plan Completed Pam Parker
YEAR 1/2
01/09/08 31/08/10
WORKPACKAGE 2:
Objective:
The objective for work package 2 is to develop a
new process for curriculum design and pilot this
13. To identify Project members expectations of the 01/09/09 30/10/09 Expectations of the Project Board Pam Parker
project and activities members in terms of the project and
activities are outlined
14. Develop a stakeholder map outlining the range, 01/09/09 30/10/09 A comprehensive Stakeholder map is Pam Parker
their level of engagement and appropriate modes developed which can used for evaluation
of communications about the project of their engagement
Page 28 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
date
15. Develop a plan for the change management 30/09/09 30/10/09 There is a plan for managing change and Pam Parker/
process and ongoing evaluation of the project the ongoing evaluation of the project Susannah
Quinsee
16. Identify programmes and Schools to involve in 30/09/09 30/10/09 A list of Programmes and Schools who David Bolton,
the pilot of the curriculum design process will be involved in the pilot is developed Susannah
Marsden,
Susannah
Quinsee, Pam
Parker and
Roberta
Williams
17. Through discussion with the stakeholders 01/11/09 31/01/10 A document detailing visions for the Pam Parker
involved in the curriculum design pilots identify curriculum design process with principles
their vision of the curriculum design process, and values developed form the
their principles and values stakeholders is developed
18. Undertake research into approaches to 01/09/09 31/12/09 Document outlining approaches to Pam Parker
curriculum design including for interdisciplinary Curriculum design and an
programmes with other institutions and through article/conference presentation with
the literature case studies
19. Review the current approval process for links to 1/11/09 31/08/10 There is a clear statement about the Susannah
the curriculum design process and information information needed for both activities Marsden
required by both to articulate this clearly and and following the review of the approval
identify changes to the approval process process there will be a new process
outlined
20. Programme and module specification format will 1/11/09 31/08/10 Programme and module specifications Susannah
be reviewed to meet stakeholder needs and will be produced as report that meet the Marsden
through consultation with them the content needs of stakeholders and in an
provided will be in a more appropriate language appropriate language
Page 29 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
date
21. The management and implementation of the 1/11/09 31/08/10 Programmes implementing the Susannah
undergraduate review recommendations enables undergraduate review recommendations Marsden
data to be shared with this project and contribute to the curriculum design
programme teams take part in this curriculum project as additional pilot studies
design project as they action the plans
22. Evaluation of pilots is undertaken to identify 01/05/10 31/08/10 Evaluation report of the pilot studies and Pam Parker and
good practice and changes that are needed article, conference presentation, case Roberta
studies Williams
23. Review the evaluation of the periodic review 01/07/10 31/08/10 An evaluation report of any implications Megan Palmer
process to identify if there are any implications for the curriculum design process is and Pam Parker
for the curriculum design process developed
24. Provide interim reports on the project with any 31/10/09 30/04/10 Two Interim reports Pam Parker
relate evaluation data included
YEAR 3
01/09/10 31/08/11
WORKPACKAGE 3:
Objective:
The objective of work package 3 is to evaluate and
build on the curriculum design process using the
evaluation data
25 Develop lessons learnt and successes of the pilot 01/11/10 28/02/11 Lessons learnt guide, Good Practice Pam Parker and
design process with stakeholder feedback on their Guide and Case Studies developed with Roberta
experiences and develop some case studies stakeholders Williamsr
26 Modify the curriculum design process drawing 01/11/10 30/06/11 Revised curriculum design process is Pam Parker,
upon the experiences of the stakeholders and the developed drawing upon the stakeholder John Gallagher
findings from activity 23 experiences & Helen
Emerson
Page 30 of 31
Version: 4
Contact: Pam Parker
th
date
27 Roll out the curriculum design process across all 01/09/10 Remaining Schools use curriculum design Ongoing Pam Parker
schools process
28 Review the stakeholder map, principles and 01/10/10 31/12/10 An evaluation of the stakeholder map Pam Parker &
values for curriculum design to ensure the and principles and values used for Susannah
information is up to date and is inclusive curriculum design to ensure these are Quinsee &
still appropriate Roberta
Williams
29 Provide interim reports on the project 31/10/10 30/04/11 Two Interim reports Pam Parker
YEAR 4
01/09/11 31/08/12
WORKPACKAGE 4:
Objective:
The objective of work package 4 is to monitor,
review and extend the curriculum development
and approval process
30 Undertake a full analysis of the project taking 01/12/11 30/06/12 Articles, conference papers, case Pam Parker &
account of areas that may need to be completed studies and guidance Susannah
after the project life ie stakeholders employing Quinsee
graduates and graduates
31 Undertake an evaluation of the change process 01/12/11 30/04/12 Articles, conference papers, case Pam Parker &
used across the institution and lessons learnt as well studies and guidance Susannah
as good practice Quinsee
32 Provide a final interim report, draft final report 31/10/11 & 31/07/12 Final Interim Report, Draft Final report Pam Parker
and the final report on the project 30/04/12 and Final Report
Page 31 of 31

PREDICT Project Plan 25th September 09

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PREDICT Project Plan 25th September 09

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project Acronym: PREDICT

Project Document Cover Sheet

Document Sign off from Project Board

JISC Project Plan

2. Aims and Objectives

Students will be involved in range of ways but these will be discussed

There is a module for staff within the MA Academic Practice

We also hold an annual learning and teaching conference which will be

Stakeholder Interest / stake Importance

In addition members of the PREDICT project team are members of the

This will be achieved through using a Delphi study technique to those

The representatives will be able to provide a view of concerns that staff

Stakeholder Interest / stake Importance

Risk Probability Severity Score Action to Prevent/Manage Risk

Risk Probability Severity Score Action to Prevent/Manage Risk

However if there are indications

Wider Community of HEI’s 2 2 4 Information from our project will be

Name of standard or Version Notes

a) City University Middleware stack which includes

10. Intellectual Property Rights

12. Project Management

Name Role Allocation of Contact Details

Name Role Allocation of Contact Details

The project board Terms of Reference are:

13. Programme Support

Detailed Project Planning

16. Evaluation Plan

17. Quality Plan

18. Dissemination Plan

Timing Dissemination Audience Purpose Key Message

Timing Dissemination Audience Purpose Key Message

19. Exit and Sustainability Plans

Project Outputs Why Sustainable Scenarios for Taking Issues to Address

Appendix A. Project Budget (this has been removed)

JISC WORK PACKAGE

Project start date: 01/09/08

You might also like