Learning and Teaching Thematic Peer groups TPG Evidence-based approaches to learning and teaching

Learning and Teaching Thematic Peer groups

TPG Evidence-based approaches to learning and teaching

Meeting 1 – Online, 23 March 2020 Summary report

Participants:

Paul McSweeney (TPG chair)

Vice-President for Learning and Teaching

University College Cork Ireland Catherine O’Mahony Director of the Centre for the

Integration of Research, Teaching and Learning (CIRTL)

University College Cork Ireland

Marja-Leena Laakso Vice-Rector for Education University of Jyväskylä Finland Anna Grönlund Head of Internationalisation and

Higher Education Policy

University of Jyväskylä Finland Irma Grdzelidze Head of the Quality Assurance office Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State

University

Georgia

Tinatin Gabrichidze Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State

University

Georgia

Marcel Dux University of Applied Sciences Berlin Germany

Lina Gaižiūnienė Coordinator for the quality assurance of study programmes

Advisor to the Rector

Kaunas University of Technology Lithuania

Horia Iovu Vice-Rector University Politehnica of Bucharest Romania

Iuliana Biru PhD candidate University Politehnica of Bucharest Romania

Wyn Morgan Vice-President for Education University of Sheffield UK

Thérèse Zhang (EUA coordinator)

Deputy Director for Higher Education Policy

European University Association (EUA)

Excused

Tilo Wendler Vice-President for Teaching, Studies and International Affairs

University of Applied Sciences Berlin Germany

Paola De Bernardi Associate Professor University of Turin Italy

Maria Ososkova Director of Career Services Center ITMO University Russia

After an introduction by UCC and a presentation of EUA’ Learning and Teaching activities and the purpose of this Thematic Peer Group, group members presented their institutions, and discussed their common understanding of the theme, based on 3 preparatory questions:

a) What does your institution do for learning and teaching to meet skills and employability demands?

Please provide a brief explanation on the approach (incl. how your institution defines the issue), and one or two examples of initiatives or policies to illustrate (with internet links, if possible).

b) Is your institution typical or atypical for the higher education sector in your country? What is the national context for employability and the role of universities in that?

c) What are the two main challenges for HEIs to meet skills and employability demands? What are the

two main opportunities?

The following points summarise the discussions.

I. Defining the theme and common points of understanding

- Group members tended to agree in seeing graduate employability as part of their mission, and related not only to their education mission, but also to the research and service to society missions – in a holistic approach.

- The group generally agreed for the following definitions:

 Graduate attributes: the ideal picture of what graduates should acquire/become Graduate attributes include transferrable skills and discipline-specific skills

 Employability skills: a combination of transferrable and discipline-specific skills - TPG members provided examples of how such endeavour is embedded into their

institutional strategy, and how they support this (see presentations in MS Teams or the Dropbox).

- The curriculum level is crucial to address employability, as it offers the possibility to work on learning outcomes, graduate attributes and pedagogy, in an integrated or “connected”

approach.

 The sense of what a study programme is about should be clear, transparent, and value-driven: What would students be, when they graduate from their study programme? What would be the value of the students’ gain, and how would we want this to be valued by future employers?

 How to design and update curriculum so to make it appropriate for future jobs, to address the agency to adapt to constantly changing environments?

 How to develop skills and attributes in all disciplines to involve all students?

 There are various ways to acquire skills, especially soft skills : in the classroom through a variety and combination of teaching methods, and through informal or non-formal learning, outside the classroom. The flexibility of the curriculum, as well as the institution’s autonomy in acting on it, are crucial.

 This poses the question of recognition for learning that take place outside the curriculum (micro-credentials, alternative credentials, etc.) – as well as general quality management aspects related to non-degree provision. This also relates to the overall role and importance of lifelong learning that is often attached to employability in European policy discussions.

 The role of interdisciplinarity could be mapped out.

 The role and goals of work placement, as a place for creating professional experience, should also be discussed. This also raises the question of what continuum can be created between education and training, and how training, under the form of work placement periods within curriculum, meets both the employers’

demand and academic requirements, in terms of contents and time period.

- The interplay between professional, technical skills and transversal skills is crucial.

Employers have a demonstrated interest towards transversal skills even for jobs with a

technical profile.

- Engagement with the academic community:

 Student representatives also strongly focus on higher education’s role in educating citizens of tomorrow, and shaping citizenship skills. There should be no contradiction between educating future professionals, and future citizens.

 Embedding skills related to employability into the curriculum for everyone with a responsibility in implementing the curriculum. Academics may not instinctively embrace employability perspectives as something they should address through learning outcomes or in their classroom – but rather refer to the university’s career office.

- Engaging with industry and local community: some group members emphasised their strong presence in the city or the region, as an actor in the economic and societal development.

 However, several group members pointed to the difficulty to speak to external stakeholders such as employers using a common language. For instance, the overall discussion on curricular and extra-curricular acquisition of skills may not matter to employers in the same way than to university representatives (would employers mind where the skills come from, within or outside the curriculum?).

 Employers are not a homogeneous group to address. In some disciplines, it is difficult to define who they are. It is also commonly assumed that engaging with employers would provide a clearer view of what is needed, while employers at times cannot tell themselves.

 Involving the employers and the professional sector in co-creating the curriculum may pose a number of questions, e.g. regarding quality management.

 Professional standards facilitate the dialogue with employers, in sectors where there are defined professional standards (e.g. regulated professions) and those are taken into account for designing the curriculum.

- Funding environment largely varies depending on countries. In some countries, it is not possible to seek for deeper engagement with external stakeholders, while in others, institutions are encouraged to reach out to private funding.

II. Challenges and opportunities

The following table is based on the group members’ contributions, and offers an overview of issues detailed above:

CHALLENGES OPPORTUNITIES

Engagement

- Meeting employers’ needs

- Collaboration with society, stakeholders - Rapidly changing markets

- Lack of common language

Funding

- Governmental support for skills and

employability (IE)

Curricular

- What’s the best way to embed employability and soft skills into the different curricula?

- Question of work placement

- Parallel transcript? E-portfolio on learning?

How to “package” in a way that could be valued for employers?

- Systematic development across curricula - Include and create opportunities for all

students

- Not time limited projects (sustainability) - Degree programmes too inflexible (more

generic skills and interdisciplinary collaboration)

- Training staff

Curricular

- Transversal skills and graduate attributes - Research based and knowledge based

professional development

- Continuous Professional Development (CPD) initiatives

- Recognition of prior learning (RPL) mechanisms

National

- National foresight and intelligence

- Universities are opinion leaders not executors

Collaboration with industry

- Network learning: dimension of learning, benefit for learners

- Advisory Board

- Co-creating content with industry

Issues for further discussion:

- Further refine the challenges and opportunities?

- Students’ feedback and contribution (their views on challenges/opportunities e.g.) - Identify good practices to address challenges (peer-learning)

- Identify priorities for change at universities and for the study programmes

III. Next meetings and working method It was agreed that:

- The group can continue with online meetings, for at least as long as there is uncertainty regarding the coronavirus situation.

- The group members will keep the dates of 15-16 October marked in their agendas, for the time being.

The group will continue working as follows:

(1) Setting up regular online meeting altogether, in May, June, and September. Meetings can be

relatively short (1h30), and should aim at reaching points of mutual understanding and

agreement:

- For end April/beginning May : reach a common understanding of the theme, and areas to be considered while addressing it as a university, and reach agreement regarding the main challenges (continuation of the work started in the March meeting)

- For mid-June : discuss concrete examples of innovative practices (either in own institution, or in another institution that one knows well) – this could be a longer meeting

- For end September : outline draft recommendations

The 15-16 October meeting (hopefully physical) should aim to finalise the recommendations, and work on the TPG’s contribution to the L&T Forum (pre-Forum workshop, breakout session at the Forum).

(2) Preparatory work will be needed in order to make these online meetings altogether efficient. This could be tackled either individually, or in smaller groups, which would be autonomous to contact each other and set up their own agenda for additional online meetings, if needed. They would report to the whole group at the next online plenary meeting.

Clear assignments should be circulated for each plenary meeting:

- Before end April/beginning May : in small groups, discuss the main challenges and considerations to attach to them for the following topics:

(a) ‘curriculum integration’/ ‘curricular strategies to develop transversal skills’

(b) ‘stakeholder engagement’

Please appoint a note taker at the beginning of the online discussion, to report back to the plenary meeting end May. If needed, Thérèse can attend your small group discussion as the secretary.

Proposal for organising small groups:

Small group 1 Small group 2

University College Cork University of Jyväskylä

University Politehnica of Bucharest ITMO University

University of Torino

University of Applied Sciences Berlin Kaunas University of Technology Ivane Javakhishvili State University University of Sheffield

- Before mid-June : individual preparation. Each institution prepares:

(a) a contribution with examples of innovative practices to address the challenges identified.

(b) a feedback from students on how they view challenges regarding employability (against the challenges identified by the group, for instance). Each institution prepares this feedback as it sees fits (survey, focus group discussions, etc.).

- Before end September : small group work. Based on examples of practices and previously

agreed challenges and opportunities, the two previously defined small groups discuss what

recommendations could be useful for European universities. Reports to be discussed

altogether at the September plenary meeting.

Here below is a summary table of work methods and preparatory assignments:

MODE DATE TASK OUTCOMES

Small group online meeting

April/Beg.

May

(modalities to be agreed by each small group)

In preparation: Review the submitted documents for 1st meeting. Is there literature regarding key challenges that could support these

discussions?

In meeting: Discuss main challenges in depth and begin identifying enablers and drivers. What about:

(a) ‘curriculum integration’/

‘curricular strategies to develop transversal skills’

(b) ‘stakeholder engagement’

Common understanding of theme, identification of main challenges.

Large group online meeting

Beg. May (90 min.)

Bringing together the two small groups’ common understanding of theme, identification of main challenges.

Large group online meeting

Mid June (90min or longer)

In preparation: Each HEI prepares

(a) document sharing examples of innovative practices

(b) a feedback from students on how they view challenges regarding employability

In meeting: Present and critique examples shared.

What is context that makes these work, how sustainable are they, what learning is transferrable to other contexts ?

Examples of innovative practices

Discussing student views on

challenges

Small group online meeting

Anytime between Mid-June and Mid-

September (modalities to be agreed by each small group)

In preparation: Create summary reports for both small groups to be reviewed before plenary meeting.

Large group online meeting

End September

In meeting: Share outcomes of small group discussions and identify in meeting areas of congruence and emerging recommendations.

Draft recommendations

Large group meeting (f-to-f or online)

15-16 October

Finalise recommendations and

preparation for L&T Forum