Archive for the ‘ Communication ’ Category


Following on from previous posts relating to the development of the Birmingham City University (BCU) ‘Rough Guide to Curriculum Design’, we’ve now shared a first draft of the document both internally for review by  local experts/stakeholders, and externally for review by colleagues at other institutions.

Sonia Hendy-Isaac (Senior Lecturer at BCU in Curriculum Design for Employer Engagement) from the project team presented at the ALT-C Conference on September 11th 2012, and showcased the draft document with the JISC and colleagues from other projects to the wider sector for the first time.

After the session, Sonia commented:

“There was some really good interest – it was well received by the group”.

Professor Paul Bartholomew (T-SPARC Project Manager) spoke about the emergence of the Rough Guide:

“It has been designed in response to curriculum design support needs that have emerged as a consequence of the pilots undertaken during the T-SPARC project at Birmingham City University.

Once the final content has been established the guide will be offered to staff in both a document and  multimedia format (with supplementary video elements) and embedded directly into the new SharePoint based Design and Approval of Programmes System (DAPS).”

It is envisaged that after the second phase of pilots using the technology supported processes for programme design and approval are completed by summer 2013, the Rough Guide will form an integral part of the new process and systems.

For more information, or to download a review copy of the Rough Guide, please contact oliver.jenkins@bcu.ac.uk

Oliver

Reflections on Project Management Methodologies

Written by tsparc
September 6th, 2011

In previous posts you will have heard how our approach to project management and business analysis has changed over the past 18 months. This post aims to give an update to readers about current T-SPARC project management methodologies.

When I initially started with T-SPARC I felt that it was important to make process mapping work for the relevant stakeholders groups. At the time that meant internal staff that we were consulting with on their views of current process, the hurdles they face through the lived experience of curriculum design any their opinions on how processes could be improved. Convoluting university processes with complex system diagrams didn’t seem appropriate, so we opted for a softer, user-friendly approach with relatively simple swim-lane diagrams. These were purposely designed to be easily interpreted by members of staff being consulted. It was during this process that we realised the process maps weren’t there just to communicate processes, but to encourage dialogue between stakeholders.

The next stage was defining the business requirements for the proposed new processes. From the information gathered during the stakeholder engagement events (including the multimedia review that was conducted during 2009), a vision of the new processes was developed that detailed how Microsoft SharePoint would be used to augment the new course design and approval processes.

The project then employed a SharePoint software developer as a contractor to work on the project alongside existing university staff to add capacity. At this point we had used PRINCE2 as a project management methodology with varying levels of success. Things such as the management structure, risk register, issue log and work package protocol were defined to PRINCE2 standards, but our CICT department felt that this project management style would not suit the [rapid] development of the new SharePoint infrastructure. Collectively, CICT and T-SPARC felt that a new approach should be sought to allow the iterative and ongoing development of the workflows. Agile (Scrum) methodology had been looked at by our CICT department in the past and used by members of their team and a decision was made to manage the T-SPARC SharePoint development using Agile methodology.

Agile allows for regular ‘Sprint’ meetings where developers, business analysts and project manager(s) evaluate previous Sprints, and define the next ones. A Sprint is a series of objectives that must be achieved to produce the next iteration of the software (or product). This approach allows a series of prototypes to be designed and tested on an ongoing basis, this in turn allows functionality to be defined iteratively and gives project teams the ability to test each iteration of the software with users and feed back to developers to add to the next Sprint for implementation and then further testing.

In addition to the regular Sprint meetings, Agile allows for daily ‘Scrum’ meetings where developers and BA’s (business analysts) meet to discuss the previous days progress, and targets for the current day. This approach has led to the rapid development and rapid integration of new features into the system.

Something thing that has been noted is that the Agile approach can lead to a lack of definitive project documentation! The nature of the rapid development means that rather than the product specification being designed and defined during the initiation of the project – post requirements gathering and analysis, the specification is defined with input from stakeholders on an ongoing basis. This leads to a Sprint log being developed, to be used as a set of Sprint deliverables, which can be updated at the end of each Sprint to define the next set of deliverables. However to counteract this lack of documentation, with Agile, you do get a series of prototypes that are developed and tested by stakeholders which ensures that the end product is fit for purpose.

We realised that two key aspects of Agile are communication between and commitment from developers and project staff. We started using the Sprint and Scrum meetings but then realised that ongoing and more responsive dialogue was needed and for this we decided to use Skype as it allows for ‘share screen’ functionality which has been extremely useful for answering quick queries without having to leave our desks.

Another observation that we have made; tightly constrained project management methodologies can restrain competent and confident members of staff. Certain staff need to be empowered with the freedom to make decisions, project teams need the need ability to be able to relax the constraints of the methodologies and be creative and to encourage the ‘doing’. Project managers need to be able to relax the constraints of particular project management methodologies to allow this, especially when using the more fluid and dynamic Agile methods. The flip side is that less competent and confident members of staff may rely on more tightly defined project management methodologies to define processes and work packages. You need buy-in from all members of a project team, and all involved need to be practiced in Agile methodologies for it to work properly.

For more information on Agile project management methodologies click here.

Oliver

Is Meaningful Engagement Without Risk?

Written by tsparc
February 18th, 2011

Readers of this blog will be aware that we have been ardent advocates for meaningful stakeholder engagement in curriculum design. As we have progressed through the project we have become aware that although the benefits far outweigh the risk, it does exist.

If course designers do a really good job of getting stakeholders involved, it is very likely that those stakeholders will actually come to care about that in which they are investing their time. It is therefore very important that we carefully manage the expectations of those stakeholders we engage.

This is well illustrated through the reflections offered below from one of our pilot partners, Kate Chadwick:

A downside to using Survey Monkey/VOXUR?
One phenomenon I have experienced in the use of survey monkey and VOXUR in order to gain information from potential students for our proposed MSc Radiotherapy is that it has created a good deal of interest in the programme.  This would have been extremely useful if we hadn’t hit a stumbling block in the approval process and been forced to alter the proposed structure of the course.  Those potential students who expressed interest initially after the survey monkey/VOXUR use were eager to find out more information, yet we were unable to say at that point even which topic areas would be included in the final structure of the MSc programme or when it might actually be running.  This has led to some potential students becoming disheartened and frustrated and we may end up losing these students to our competitor institutions.  Fortunately, so far, these potential students have been placated through close and frequent communication but it has been a difficult situation to manage and one which, had we anticipated it, we might have been able to take steps to avoid when conducting our information gathering stage.

Kate Chadwick
Joint Postgraduate Lead for Radiotherapy

As can be seen, the radiotherapy team had done enough to involve people to such an extent that they created a situation in which potential students felt they had a vested interest in the developing course. This is an excellent indicator of effective engagement; but there is certainly food for thought here in relation to our need to manage expectations of stakeholders and to alert them to the potential for positive and less positive progress in relation to course design.

Paul

voxurApologies that this post is a little delayed!

In early December I had a trip down to meet the UG-Flex project team and colleagues at the University of Greenwich to give them a tech-demo with one of T-SPARCs VOXUR units. UG-Flex wanted to showcase the equipment to a group of colleagues to generate interest in the use of video based technologies such as the VOXURs that T-SPARC are advocating the use of during stakeholder engagement activities in the course design and approval process at BCU. UG-Flex borrowed the unit for several weeks over the Christmas period, hopefully long enough for it to have made an impact on potential users and highlighted the benefits to them that are achievable through the effective use of this type of technology.

A link to the Greenwich blog can be found here.

To give you an example of the types of rich response you can expect to gather from this type of stakeholder engagement activity, I’ve hyper-linked (bottom of page) to a video edit produced in collaboration with our pilot course team, the Psychology Graduate Diploma that is being developed here at BCU.

During this particular exercise, 20 students responded to a series of 15 questions (on curriculum design related issues) on the VOXUR units over a 5 day period when it was convenient for them to take 15 minutes or so out of their day. The results speak for themselves and will be an invaluable source of data to the course team whilst they progress through the course design process. Although these responses may not be surprising in their content, the ease of capture is hard to replicate and the transparent authenticity of student opinion is represented in a way that is difficult to achieve by other means such as a questionnaires. The videos will be shared back to the students at some point in the near future (using view profiles on our e-portfolio Mahara) to show them how their input was used in the shaping of the new course. This will demonstrate to students what it means to have their voices represented authentically.

In this example video edit, students were asked for their opinions on:

‘How can assessment feedback mechanisms be improved on your programme?’

Click here for a link to the .wmv file

Click here for a link to the .mp4 file

All comments welcomed.

Oliver

Co-Authoring of Blogs with Pilot Course Teams

Written by tsparc
July 23rd, 2010

We recently discussed the idea of publishing a monthly e-bulletin to notify pilot course teams on progress and project updates. After giving it some consideration, we realised that the e-bulletin would probably contain similar, if not identical information to that which is published on the blog. We then had a eureka moment and thought, why not co-author the blog with relevant stakeholder that wish to collaborate (instead of notify) with us through regular blog contributions? This approach would be more closely related to our philosophy on stakeholder engagement (a copy of the table can be found here) and would allow stakeholders to collaborate in an open forum, as a partners of the the project.

The first stakeholders that came to mind were the course teams that are piloting the T-SPARC approval methods and technologies. As the MSc Radiotherapy team have been very enthusiastic to engage with all aspects of the project, I approached the Joint PG Lead for Radiotherapy, Kate Chadwick, who was keen to work with us and contribute towards the T-SPARC blog. After a brief conversation, Kate agreed that this collaborative work would be something she would be keen to engage with and offered to author a blog post on her experiences so far (which will follow this post).

This innovative approach will add a new dimension to the T-SPARC blog and will hopefully give blog readers, as well as the project team, a better insight into the workings of the project and updates on progress from independent stakeholders perspectives. Other pilot course teams will also be approached in the coming weeks and given the same opportunities to collaborate with the project team on the blog.

Comments welcomed.

Oliver

VOXUR units and the Data Protection Act

Written by tsparc
July 12th, 2010

This morning, the Project Team headed off for a meeting with the Information Manager and his Deputy to discuss the Data Protection Act (1998), and how we might interpret it whilst writing a bespoke Data Protection Policy for use with the recently purchased VOXUR units. The meeting highlighted some very interesting points, and also pitfalls.

  • Will a ‘one size fits all’ approach be appropriate, or will different groups of stakeholders require different policies?
  • How long will we be storing the video footage for?
  • What purposes may it be useful to use the data for in the future?
  • How will footage be moderated, and by whom?
  • Will staff moderate their own footage, and who would (if anyone) moderate this?
  • Will users (who set the questions and analyse the data) have to sign any documentation to inform them that they cannot edit the footage?

The more we discussed it, the more questions it seemed to raise, and the more solutions we had to generate. The Information Manager is now in the process of authoring a bespoke Data Protection Policy especially for the T-SPARC team to use in conjunction with the VOXUR units.

We are also hoping to re purpose the material that they produce for use with the Flip video cameras and SONY audio recorders. This will most likely take the form of a consent form / disclaimer.

Please leave comments / advice below if you’ve had any experience of writing Data Protection Policies for use with video recording equipment. Did you overlook anything in the early stages of development that you could warn us about?

Thanks,

Oliver

Progress Update – Consultation Events

Written by tsparc
June 14th, 2010

Well – A lot has happened here with the T-SPARC project at Birmingham City University in recent weeks.

First up, the (academic) staff consultation events which have been held over the past few weeks, around 40 staff attended, distributed between 4 separate events. The events lasted for 5 hours and were structured with several different activities scheduled for attendees throughout the day. After some brief introductions from attendees and project staff, the Project Manager gave an Introduction to the T-SPARC project and a review of progress so far.

During other exercises, a range of data collection techniques were employed, including some exercises using Flip video cameras, which allowed us to gather a range of different types of data that will reflect the views of staff expressed at the events.

From these consultation events, the project team have identified 3 courses so far that will be taking part in the first phase of full pilot schemes (using all technologies and new processes available to them). There are also another 2 course teams that have volunteered to pilot specific aspects that that they feel would benefit the approval/re-approval of their courses.

More recently, members of the team have been coding the videos produced at the events and inputting quantitative data from some of the questionnaires into spreadsheets. The team are now beginning to analyse the results. Once collated, this rich source of information generated at the consultation events will inform documentation produced by Senate on new procedures and guidelines on programme design and approval/re-approval.

On a different note, the VOXUR units T-SPARC ordered have been delivered, if you haven’t heard of these before, click here for more info. JISC recommended these pieces of equipment to us as a way to collect video data efficiently and effectively. Watch this space for more feedback on the VOXUR units once we get the pilot schemes up and running.

In conclusion, we seem to be making very positive progress at the moment, the project continues to benefit from a high level of institutional support. This can be attributed to (amongst other things) members of the project team working across a number of different projects simultaneously and being able to develop synergies and encourage institutional buy-in to the T-SPARC project though their involvement in other areas. This beneficial environment has made some of the barriers we were looking to climb become more scalable in reality, a situation we hope we can continue to enjoy in the future.

Oliver

T-SPARC’s most useful websites of 2009

Written by tsparc
January 8th, 2010

printed internetHappy new year to you all! As 2009 has now come to a close we thought it was appropriate to have a look back at all the wonderful technologies we have found throughout the last year. Below I have listed some of the Internet based tools and sites we have come across when exploring options for disseminating the activity of the T-SPARC project.

Random Useful websites

• Zamzar – http://www.zamzar.com/
Free online file converter. A life saver when your ‘PDF’ really needs to be a ‘JPEG’ for your blog!

• Tiny url – http://tinyurl.com/ and bit.ly – http://bit.ly/
Both equally good for cutting down URLs for ‘no mess’ tweets and blogs. Although Tweetdeck has its own ‘URL shortener’

• TED – http://www.ted.com/
‘Ideas worth spreading’ indeed! Some free lectures/ speeches/ talks from some truly inspiring and fascinating people on a variety of topics.

 
Video sites

• YouTube – http://www.youtube.com/TSPARC
All T-SPARC’s stakeholder videos in one place (including xtranormal videos and captions)

• Xtranormal – http://www.xtranormal.com/profile/1831779/
This is an excellent tool for anonymity of our stakeholders in interviews. Also great that it is compatible with ‘YouTube’ and ‘Overstream’.

• Overstream – http://www.overstream.net/
Overstream is a fantastic tool for captioning videos to create greater accessibility. To find out more about T-SPARC’s use of ‘Overstream’ read this blog: http://blogt.bcu.ac.uk/tsparc/2009/12/16/168/

 
Twitter and other sites

• Twitter – http://twitter.com/TSPARC_BCU
Twitter is a new and innovative way to connect with like minded people and has proved invaluable in creating an online community here at Birmingham City University. It is a quick and easy way to communicate with only 140 characters available in a tweet  so your message must be quite concise. I feel that it is best used in a project management style to update stakeholders on the project’s progress and to also send out links to the project blog or other informative websites.

• TweepML – http://tweepml.org/23dcb09/
A very useful way to keep lists of people from certain groups. The above link is a list of all the ‘tweeters/ twitterers/ tweeple’ in Design Cluster B, and here is a list from Birmingham City University http://tweepml.org/BCU-Twitterers/

• Tweetdeck – http://www.tweetdeck.com/
A superb way to manage more than one Twitter account, with quick and easy viewing of direct messages and mentions and a facility to search for words, phrases and hash tags, as well as a ‘URL shortener’.

 

Other T-SPARC sites

• Flickr – http://www.flickr.com/photos/tsparc/
A place to keep all of the project’s photos and pictures. We’re hoping to add a lot more to this over the coming months.

• Netvibes – http://www.netvibes.com/tsparc#T-SPARC
Netvibes has proved to be one of the most useful tools that I have found. Through this marvellous site I have built our own web page for T-SPARC which brings all the information and technologies we need together. I have created 3 tabs: ‘T-SPARC’,  which has the T-SPARC blog, our Flickr and YouTube accounts all easily accessible as well as education news websites and Birmingham City University website. There is also a ‘Twitter tab’ which has links to #dcb09 and #jisccdd aswell as the T-SPARC twitter account. I have also created a JISC tab where there are links via RSS feeds to various updates from the JISC.

• WordPress Blog –  http://blogt.bcu.ac.uk/tsparc/
This blog has also proved invaluable.  It is a space where we can document the trials and tribulations of the project and keep people up to date with the project with more than 140 characters! 

Hannah

The Accessibility Factor

Written by tsparc
December 16th, 2009

accessibilityAs our project is described to be ‘Agile and Responsive’ in our title, we thought it was important that our work reflects this and that we are as inclusive as possible with our stakeholder engagement, therefore making sure that our resources are accessible to all stakeholders is imperative to the T-SPARC project.

After discovering this article on twitter ‘YouTube introduces automatic captions for deaf viewers’ it got me thinking about the baseline review video we have loaded onto T-SPARC’s YouTube Channel. I began to wonder how accessible it really was, because at that time it was the only video representation of T-SPARC on YouTube and it had had quite a few hits. I realised that without at least a transcript it meant that the deaf and hard of hearing communities as well as people for whom English is not their first language, would struggle to access this resource as well as people who did not have speakers on their computer.

I decided to do some detective work and look into captioning. You may notice that I am writing about ‘captioning’ and not ‘subtitling’. ‘Captions are usually in the same language as the audio. Subtitles are usually a translation.’ (See point 6). When researching captions and subtitles I came across ‘Caption it yourself’ which recommended http://www.overstream.net/. I began to explore overstream and was surprised at how easy it was to caption our 3 minute video. In fact the most time consuming part of it was writing the transcripts –putting them onto overstream was a breeze, all you need is a little bit of patience…

The service was free, all T-SPARC needed was a log in.  After having a bit of a play around with Overstream I began to realise how crucial this tool could be to the accessibility of our work. Not just in the case of a deaf person trying to access it – but it could also be argued that captions can actually assist learning. (see ‘The benefits of captions’)

Our Cluster has also had some interesting discussions around accessibility issues at our most recent Cluster meeting in Cardiff  (see: “No CAMEL route is long, with good company”) in October. We were joined by Katya Hosking, the Inclusive Curriculum Officer at Cardiff University to discuss Equality & Diversity issues around curriculum design and the accessibility of programmes. It was a fantastic session which made a lot of us in the room question the way that we were doing things, hence my thoughts on captioning.

I must admit that I do have a personal interest in this as I am currently working towards my Level 2 certificate in British Sign Language so who knows – perhaps in the future you may see me signing away at the bottom of the screen!

To enable captions on this video please click ‘cc’ on the right hand side of the screen.

Hannah

Stakeholder Engagement

Written by tsparc
December 16th, 2009

Stakeholder engagement is central to the T-SPARC project.  We are using the model below (adapted from Rudd et al (2006)) to plan our approach to stakeholder engagement – it guides our communication plans and defines the type of activity needed to achieve a particular level of ‘buy in’ from all we hope to engage.

stakeholder table 7.12.09

Please click on image and go to ‘all sizes’ for a larger, clearer image.

Through comprehensive stakeholder engagement activity we aim to:

  • Obtain wider community support of the project
  • Gather useful data and ideas
  • Provide more sustainable decision making

As we, at Birmingham City University, have begun to explore our existing practices in stakeholder engagement we have concluded that, in relation to the above model, ‘consult’ is the highest level to which people generally aspire. This finding is particularly prominent in the student population, members of which express satisfaction in being consulted and have no aspiration to engage at the higher levels or any awareness of what might be achieved by engaging in such activity.

The T-SPARC project has at its core an aim to engage stakeholders more fully in the activity of curriculum design AND the design of the very processes and tools that will deliver this engagement activity. Only by co-designing systems, processes and tools with stakeholders can the project team deliver solutions which will meet the needs of curriculum designers in a way that will be used and valued.

Now that the project team have completed their initial review as mandated by the JISC, we will begin to develop stakeholder engagement practice so that we will be in a position to support collaboration (as defined in the model above) in the design of new systems, processes and tools and move towards the development of some product specifications which emerge from identified stakeholder needs.

stakeholders_1_col

Hannah.