genetics education networking for innovation and ...evaluation strategy and helped us to focus on...

GENIE, University of Leicester – Interim evaluation report 2007

1

Genetics Education Networking for Innovation and Excellence GENIE

University of Leicester

Interim Evaluation Report July 2007

Contents

Page A – Executive summary 2 B – Introduction 3 B1 – Structure and audience 3 B2 – Purpose of the report 3

B3 – Overview of the types of evidence used in the report 4 C – Brief Description of the Aims and Scope of GENIE 4 C1 – Specific goals 5 C2 – Activities 5 C3 – GENIE participants 7 D – Evaluation Framework and Approach 8 D1 – Evaluation Strategy 8

D2 – Reflections on the evaluation process 11 E – Findings 12 E1 – The student experience 12 E2 – Effects on teachers 15 E3 – Teaching and learning resources and approaches 17 E4 – Impact on curricula and programme development 18 E5 – Strategic impact within the institution 18

E6 – Connections with internal partners 19 E7 – Connections with external partners 20 F – Lessons Learnt and Impact on Future Planning 22 F1 – Successes,surprises and balance of activities 22 F2 – Teaching practices and enrichment of the student experience 23 F3 – GENIE as a Vehicle of Change 24 F4 – The CETL Initiative 25

Bibliography and References 26 Appendix 1 – Current GENIE Projects 27 Appendix 2 – Student Activities 30 Appendix 3 – Publications, Presentations and involvement in workshops 31

Appendix 4 – Workshops and Seminars Organised by GENIE 35 Appendix 5 – Outreach Events and Activities to Raise Public Awareness 36 Appendix 6 – Participants in GENIE 38 Appendix 7 – Original Two Year and Five Year Targets 39 Appendix 8 – Dissemination Locally, Regionally and Nationally 41 Appendix 9 – Sources of Data 42

Contents of the CD-ROM 43


2

A Executive summary

The GENIE CETL builds on existing expertise and synergy between genetics education and world-class science. Through a number of projects, we are developing innovative approaches and

resources, facilitated by the refurbishment of teaching spaces for laboratory and computing

classes, and group work. We are also establishing a network of institutions engaged in teaching

genetics, thus promoting the sharing of both resources and experience. An internationally accessible database of these resources, the Virtual Genetics Education Centre, is being

assembled. Intrinsic to our approach is the embedding of generic skills, meaning that our work is of

relevance to a broad range of disciplines. As Genetics has a wide impact on many areas of science and society, an important part of GENIE’s activities is raising public understanding of

science and outreach activities for schools and colleges. We are developing internal and external

connections, and one of our key longer term aims is to raise the profile of teaching and learning in

our own University as well as wider in the UK Higher Education sector; becoming an efficient vehicle for change in strategy and policy making.

Our evaluation framework is aimed at assessing how effectively we are meeting our goals. We want to ask the following questions:

What are our goals? Have we achieved them?

How do we know that we have achieved them?

How could we do better?

In the original bid we outlined projected two and five year outcomes. Our two year targets were

enabling (things that needed to be set up): space, facilities, dissemination strategies, the basic

frameworks for our projects, workshops and seminars. We have achieved and indeed exceeded these targets. Whilst many targets, (particularly those which are shorter term) can easily be

evaluated using the above four question framework, this proves more difficult with targets such as

‘to evaluate the awareness and understanding of the work of the CETL’; this is one of our five year targets. Throughout the last two years we have become more efficient, experienced and equipped

to evaluate the variety of our activities and targets. We have used a RUFDATA (Reasons, Uses,

Foci, Data, Audience, Timing and Agencies) methodology and this has given structure to our

evaluation strategy and helped us to focus on priority areas. These are: • The student experience

• Effects on teachers

• The development of teaching and learning resources and approaches • Impact on curricula and programme development

• Strategic impact within the institution

• Connections with internal partners

• Connections with external partners

Findings in relation to each of these targets are presented in the report. Although only two years

into the funding for GENIE, we have made significant achievements in each of these priority areas. All of the proposals in the original bid are still part of our activities. However, emphasis has

changed. For example, there is much more project work than anticipated and this reflects our

success at raising awareness of GENIE internally, but there is still some work to do in this area. We would like to see GENIE directly impacting on curricula and programmes in all Faculties. There is

more student involvement than originally planned; it is now clear that this is of paramount

importance when focussing on the impact on the student experience. The Virtual Genetics

Education Centre is yet to be launched as an internationally accessible site, this is anticipated for the Autumn and will give us new challenges in terms of evaluation and change.


3

There is evidence that we are impacting on strategies within the institution; for example changes in

the learning and teaching strategy, strategies for widening participation and outreach, and reward

and recognition for excellence in teaching and learning. As GENIE moves on, this needs to

continue to be a high priority. Sustainability of GENIE is important if we are to set long term agendas. Commitment from the University in terms of people and infrastructure beyond the current

funding period has secured this to some extent, but securing additional external funding is also

important and is now also high on the agenda.

External connections have already been made through our outreach with schools, colleges and

other groups from the community, and through collaborations with other partners. This needs to become a higher priority over the next three years as we focus on the target of becoming a vehicle

of change for the higher education sector generally. GENIE has had a very successful two years

but this is just the beginning.

B Introduction

B1 Structure and audience

This report contains a summary of the work of the CETL to date. Details of all of our activities are

not included but examples are outlined in the text and, where it is useful in order to illustrate the breadth of the activities, more details are given in the Appendices and the attached CD-ROM. The

summary provides the framework for the rest of the report, putting the evaluation work into context.

As well as outlining our overall evaluation framework examples are given of how individual activities

have been reflectively reviewed during their development. The contribution of activities to the overall GENIE aims is also assessed. In the original bid document deliverables were defined and

two year and five year goals outlined. As the work of the CETL has progressed these have been

reviewed and reassessed as part of the evaluation framework and this report also reflects on this process.

The findings of this interim evaluation are outlined in terms of seven main foci: the student experience, effects on teachers, the development of teaching and learning resources and

approaches, the impact on curricula and programme development, strategic impact within the

institution and connections with internal and external partners. The report concludes with a

comment on where we are in relation to these priorities and how our achievements can now be used as a springboard for the next phase, which will have the same foci but with emphasis on

GENIE impact on other institutions and for the sector nationally.

The report is written for the interim self evaluation for HEFCE but it is also intended for broad

readership within the institution and wider and will be made available in full on the GENIE website.

The content of the report has formed part of interim progress reports to the GENIE management

and steering group committees. It will form a focus for our review by the University, which is to include internal and external reviewers and is scheduled to take place in Autumn 2007. The report

will also be a foundation for the continuation of our evaluation strategy, production of future annual

evaluation reports and of course the summative report at the end of the funding period.

B2 Purpose of the report

One purpose of the report is for accountability to the institution, to HEFCE, to collaborative partners

and more generally; therefore accessibility of its contents is important. A further purpose is to facilitate reflection on work to date so that strategic planning for the remainder of the funding period

and beyond can take place. It will be informative with respect to both successful and unsuccessful

approaches. The report will also provide a useful dissemination tool for the work of the CETL which

should help with future collaborations and impact locally, regionally and nationally.


4

B3 Overview of the types of evidence used in the report The form of the evidence base is varied depending on the aims and objectives of individual

activities. For example, projects have their own appropriate evidence base which may include student or staff feedback in the form of questionnaire responses, focus group discussions or

structured and semi-structured interviews; assessment results and other outcomes such as student

intake numbers or graduate destinations. For the Virtual Genetics Education Centre the evidence

will be based on the number of people accessing the site, the number of people using the resources and the type of feedback given by users. For outreach work with schools and colleges,

the evidence will be based on feedback from both pupils and teachers on the activities together

with data relating to the post 18 destination of the pupils taking part. In contrast the evidence base for impact on policy and strategy involves interviews with senior management, GENIE staff

engagement with policy and strategy making structures and consideration of policy documents.

Sources for the different sources can be found in Appendix 9 and this report contains illustrative examples of some of this evidence in different forms:

In the text

There are summaries of some of the data and illustrative quotes from various forms of feedback, where it may be useful. Hyperlinks to appropriate websites are given in places so that further

details of evidence and/or information can be viewed.

Appendicies

More detail is given in the attached appendices. An example is Appendix 3, a list of publications

and presentations arising from the work of the core GENIE team as evidence of pedagogic research and external dissemination of the work of GENIE

CD-ROM

In addition there is a CD-ROM containing examples of audiovisual evidence of a range of activities. For example, this informal type of evidence shows how students and/ or participants in outreach

are actually using the activities and the learning spaces. It enables examples to be shown of how

different teaching approaches and technologies are being tried out and it provides the opportunity to display some of the dissemination activities and materials. There are also some case study

examples for specific projects showing the details of the data obtained during the evaluation

process. The CD-ROM is attached to the back cover of this report and a list of its contents is

shown on the back page.

The report overall should give a testable picture of what we have tried to achieve, how we have

tried to do it, what has worked and what has not. It should also give a vision for the future strategy of the work of GENIE.

C Brief Description of the Aims and Scope of GENIE

In our bid to establish a CETL in genetics education we made the case for our excellence in both research and teaching. We emphasised the synergy between these activities that enabled us to

provide a learning experience at the cutting edge of world science. The overall aim of GENIE is to

build on this, developing resources for genetics education and producing internal and external networks for the dissemination of good practice and innovation. Intrinsic to our philosophy is the

embedding of generic skills and the application of generic approaches to other fields, enhancing the

learning experience of a wide range of students. The broad impact of modern genetics on society as a whole and the challenge of attracting students to science subjects also puts raising public

awareness and developing outreach programmes high on our agenda.


5

C1 Specific goals In order to achieve the aims outlined above specific goals are :

• To refurbish and create teaching spaces to provide improved facilities for practical

classes, computing and group work.

• To establish a GENIE centre for efficient interaction of support, teaching and research

staff.

• To develop, produce and evaluate subject-specific and generic skills-based resources.

• To provide opportunities for the development of new programmes.

• To develop a programme of workshops and seminars in order to foster collaborations

and to disseminate the work of GENIE.

• To work with a range of organisations in order to raise public awareness of genetics and

Higher Education; to work with schools and colleges to extend our outreach programmes in order to further engage young people.

• To establish and maintain a Virtual Genetics Education Centre (VGEC).

• To lead and encourage pedagogic reflection and research within and beyond the

Institution.

• To embed change in relation to teaching and learning practices and the reward and

recognition for achievements in these areas.

C2 Activities

There are a wide range of activities being carried out in order to achieve the above goals. Our

capital developments include facilities for undergraduates, taught postgraduates and outreach

programmes and GENIE activities relate to all of these. Some of the activities were proposed at the bid stage, others have grown out of experience and opportunity. In all five key areas of our

current activities we are working with partners within the institution and/or externally. The

development of an East Midlands CETLs network is one such external collaboration involving the nine CETLs based at the Universities of Leicester, Loughborough, Nottingham and Nottingham

Trent. We have joined together in a proactive and productive network. We are working on

overarching themes that are important to us all such as reflection and research, reward and recognition, outreach etc. We hold regular meetings and workshops and discussing strategies to

maximise our impact on policy and strategy locally, regionally and nationally (Appendix 4 and CD-

ROM- East Midlands Network).

The five key areas of GENIE’s activities are:

• Project work to develop resources, approaches, new modules and engagement in pedagogic reflection and research.

• Design, collection, collation and evaluation of materials for a Virtual Genetics Education Centre

• Organising workshops and seminars – A National Network of Stakeholders in Genetic

Education


6

• Development and expansion of undergraduate curricula and programmes and taught MSc

programmes.

• Development of outreach programmes for the general public and schools and colleges.

Projects and Research

There is a rolling programme of project work falling into 3 general categories; those being carried out by CETL staff, those being carried out by associated staff with help from the CETL either

through staff development or funding and those being carried out in collaboration with other

partners or institutions.

There are currently 17 active projects, far exceeding the 4-6 expected at this stage. This reflects

the wealth of ideas and enthusiasm shown by staff for development and innovation. To illustrate the

breadth of our work in this area a full list of current projects is shown in Appendix 1. Some of the projects, such as that to develop DNA structure and sequencing tutorials, involve the development

of resources and approaches, whereas others involve a study of practices central to teaching and

learning such as feedback to students and assessment. However, all are aimed at improving the student experience and all involve reflective evaluation. One of the areas of activity that we had not

focussed on at the beginning was student involvement in our work and several of our projects are

collaborations between staff and students (such as the project on student feedback) and the

students are developing an active GENIE network which is having a growing input into the work of the CETL. Appendix 2 shows the breadth of student involvement in GENIE activities.

It is a key aim of the CETL to lead pedagogic research in the institution by encouraging and supporting such activities. We have been involved in setting up and taking an active role in a

pedagogic research group within Biological Sciences and, in collaboration with other Leicester

based CETLs , we have established a new electronic journal (JETL Journal for Exellence in

Teaching and Learning) for the exchange of innovation and research in teaching and learning. Our research activity is demonstrated by the publications and presentations of GENIE work and the

workshops and meetings that members of the core GENIE team have taken part in (Appendix 3).

This activity is of course vital for dissemination of our work and a starting point for our strategy for impacting on the wider HE sector Pedagogic research is also one of the overarching themes that

relates to the work of the East Midlands CETL Network (see section E for more detail)

The Virtual genetics Education Centre

This is a continuing programme of work producing a genetics information and education resource in

the form of an extensive web-based network. Resources for undergraduate and postgraduate

students, HE programme co-ordinators and teachers nationally provide the central platform and there are tiers for schools and colleges, health professionals and the general public. This brings

together the project work of the CETL, resources from other stakeholders and resources from our

outreach activities. It also provides links to other on-line resources that have been tried and evaluated by us. There are many, many on-line resources for various areas of genetics but our

plans for the VGEC are something different. Resources will have full details of how activities such

as practicals and tutorials can be carried out, details of the development of resources and the process and outcomes of evaluation will be included as will details and outcomes of research

related to the pedagogic basis of the resources and approaches. We will ask people who use the

VGEC to give feedback and to log any outcomes of evaluation that they may carry out relating to

the resources and or activities. Our vision is for an interactive educational environment which is the product of sharing of ideas, resources and good practice. This will of course be an evolving part of

GENIE’s work which will continue for the life of the CETL and beyond. Activities to date have been

involved with establishing a framework for the VGEC, making evaluated materials available and evaluating existing on-line resources. We plan to launch the VGEC in the Autumn of this year and


7

initially platforms for Higher Education and schools and colleges will be made available reflecting

the breadth of activity in these areas during the first two years of the CETL.

Workshops and Seminars and the National Network of Stakeholders in Genetics Education

One vision, outlined in the original bid was to establish a UK wide network of people involved in

delivering Genetics programmes in order to optimise the sharing of best practise. We started with members from eight institutions and this has now grown to fifteen. Some of our workshops and

seminars have been aimed at this group, others have been related to the East Midlands CETL

Network or to GENIE project work. Some have been national workshops and others local. For example, we have been proactive in setting up a pedagogic research group within Biological

Sciences, and workshops, to which all members of the University are invited, have been organised

on a regular basis (Appendix 4).

Development of undergraduate and postgraduate programmes and curricula

GENIE has been involved in the development and implementation of several new modules for our

range of Biological Sciences BSc and Medical School MBChB programmes as well as being part of the development team of a new BSc programme in Medial Physiology, building on our existing

Medical Genetics programme.

We have also extended the taught laboratory Master’s provision by building on our MSc in

Molecular Genetics and establishing a Faculty wide programme of such courses which share

resources and curricula in order to offer an extensive range of options for home and overseas

students. The facilities provided by the GENIE refurbishments and equipment, together with new activities for the laboratory and tutorial settings have enabled this expansion to happen quite

rapidly. Over the last two years there has been a three fold increase in student intake from 32 to

an anticipated 90 for.2007/8.

Outreach

Outreach to schools, colleges and the general public was always part of the remit of GENIE. However, our activities in this area increased after the additional capital funding from HEFCE

enabled the refurbishment of laboratory and computing facilities specifically for such work. Our

existing work experience, Summer School and Taster Day programmes have continued and expanded. In addition we now also operate a range of other activities and visits for primary to sixth

form pupils. We have also hosted several visits of adult groups from the community who want to

here about the applications of genetics and have the opportunities to carry out some ‘hands on’ activities and debate some of the key ethical issues with people working in the field.

C3 GENIE Participants Staff involved include the Director, Teaching Fellows, Research Assistants and support staff

employed by GENIE, associated University staff who are active in a wide range of GENIE’s

activities and other staff involved in teaching genetics and/or leading GENIE projects (see Appendix 6). These lists are growing and diversifying from the Genetics staff initially involved two years ago.

Director The Director’s position is a fulltime permanent position responsible for the co-ordination and

strategic planning of GENIE’s activities and the roles of GENIE staff. She is directly involved in

several projects, presenting work locally, nationally and internationally and is taking a leading role in promoting pedagogic research within the University. Part of her role is to develop interactions,

collaborations and networks locally, regionally and nationally. She is also proactive in strategic

planning and policy making within the University and this role is extending to have a national

impact.


8

Teaching Fellows

There are three Teaching Fellows which are lecturer level appointments and, like the Director, they

are fulltime permanent positions. This is a major commitment from the University which guarantees the continuation of GENIE beyond the five year funding period. All of the TFs are involved in

project work and pedagogic research and they make significant contributions to several teaching

programmes. In addition each has a special responsibility related to the core GENIE activities. Cas Kramer is outreach co-ordinator, Mark Goodwin is responsible for overseeing the development

of the Virtual Education Centre and Nicola Suter-Giorgini is working directly with the students,

developing the network and helping develop projects with student involvement

Research Associates/Assistants

Currently there are five RAs carrying out research associated with projects. Three of these are

jointly funded by either National Teaching Fellowship funds awarded to Chris Willmott or University Teaching Enhancement Funds.

Support staff The Departmental Services Manager of the Department of Genetics also has the role of GENIE

manager and has responsibility for purchasing and managing GENIE accounts and budgets on a

day to day basis, organising staffing contracts and co-ordinating with other University service Departments on behalf of GENIE. The University has dedicated 25% of an accountants time,

working within the University Finance Dept, to take responsibility for the overall accounts of the

three CETLs in which the University of Leicester is involved. The Administrator and Clerical

Assistant are responsible for the day to day running of the GENIE office, maintaining the website, supporting other CETL staff and co-ordinating with people and academic departments within the

University and other external stakeholders. They also have responsibility for organising workshop

and seminar programmes.

Other core staff

These staff have been involved since the initial vision for GENIE was proposed and are taking

leading roles in project management and also the overall management of GENIE and are internal members of the management committee.

Other associated staff These are staff involved in teaching in Genetics and many are also involved in GENIE projects.

Some may be in receipt of GENIE bursaries or small projects funding.

Students

There is also an ever growing participation from both undergraduate and postgraduate students

(Appendix 2). There is a GENIE student network which has been set up over the last year to have

input into the management and strategic planning of GENIE’s activities. Some of our projects involve direct collaboration with students and there are also many students involved in

demonstrating and helping in the outreach events.

D Evaluation Framework and Approach

D1 Evaluation Strategy At the time of submitting the original bid we were already involved in a cycle of development,

evaluation, reflection, and change. Evaluation strategy involved the use of student feedback,

assessment outcomes, feedback from teachers, peer observation of teaching and feedback from

external examiners. This has continued for the work of the CETL but, as we have become more experienced, our strategy has become more structured. Connections and networking with other

CETLs and people involved in CETL evaluation has definitely helped in this respect. To date


9

evaluation of GENIE activities have been coordinated by an internal committee feeding back to the

management committee and University Strategy committee.

In the original bid document we defined deliverables and outlined two year and five year goals. These were reviewed and adjusted after one year, particularly in the context of the extra £350,000

capital funding (Appendix 7). Measuring achievements against these goals has involved answering

the questions:

1. What are our goals?

2. Have we achieved them? 3. How do we know that we have achieved them?

4. How could we do things better ?

To help us to plan evaluation such that we could answer questions 2 ,3 and 4 we have used a framework based on the RUFDATA approach (Saunders, 2005) to plan our evaluation strategy .

Individual projects have also found it useful to plan using this framework, but focussing on the

specific project priorities.

Outlined below is a summary of our RUFDATA framework used to plan the evaluation focussing on

the overall priorities of GENIE’s work

Reasons and purposes of the evaluation

• For accountability providing feedback to GENIE, the University and HEFCE • To get feedback in relation to specific projects or events

• To identify what is successful and what is not in terms of our goals

• To facilitate the management and implementation of reflective change • To help with development (this could be facilities, curricula, resources, approaches etc)

• To give information, backed up by evidence, to other teachers and stakeholders in GENIE’s

work so that they can judge the usefulness of particular projects for their specific

applications • For strategic planning of GENIE priorities

Uses of the evaluation

• Generation of reports for management committees, the University and HEFCE

• To provide data for publications and presentations to disseminate the outcomes of the work

of GENIE • To provide data and evidence to facilitate input into strategic and policy planning locally,

regionally and nationally

Foci for the evaluation

• The student experience

• Effects on teachers • The development of teaching and learning resources and approaches

• Impact on curricula and programme development

• Strategic impact within the institution • Connections with internal partners

• Connections with external partners

.

Data and evidence for the evaluation

• Feedback from students and staff on the use of refurbished facilities and equipment -

numbers of students benefiting, examples of opportunities for using new approaches, comments relating to student engagement, questionnaire feedback relating to

appropriateness, ease of use and durability.


10

• Feedback from project work - breadth and level of projects,student and staff

questionnaires, focus group data, assessment data, feedback from external users of

resources, feedback from internal review panels and external examiners for new courses,

acknowledgement by external awards, informal evidence such as videos and pictures.

• Data relating to specific outcomes - admissions data, numbers of students, degree

classification data, student destination data.

• Quantitative and qualitative data relating to outreach work - questionnaire feedback from

pupils and teachers, numbers of participants in activities, tracking data of numbers of pupils going on to HE and in science subjects, informal audiovisual evidence.

• Evidence for the dissemination of GENIE’s work within the University - press releases,

articles and features in University bulletins and documents, number of people engaged in GENIE projects and activities.

• Evidence for impact on strategy within the University - interviews with senior management and other staff, level of proactive engagement of GENIE staff in policy and strategy making

committees, strategy documents produced.

• Evidence for interaction with external partners - articles, brochures demonstrating

dissemination, publications and presentations of GENIE – based research, initiation of

collaborative projects, level of involvement of GENIE staff in national workshops and

discussion groups.

Audience for the evaluation

The interim and final evaluation reports will be available on the website for general access.

However, specific audiences of the reports and detailed edata and evidence are listed.

• GENIE staff • Evaluation group

• Management committees and University Strategy committee

• University Review Committee • HEFCE

• Users of GENIE facilities, resources materials etc.

• Other HEIs, HE organisations and policy making authorities

Timing of evaluation

• Feedback will be collected at the time of events, workshops etc • Feedback, collection and analysis will be ongoing for modules, courses etc

• Feedback, data and evidence will be collected and analysed for each project as appropriate

and included in interim and final project reports. • Summary reports will be made at monthly GENIE staff meetings

• Interim evaluation reports will be made at GENIE management and University Strategy

Committee meetings.

• Interim self-evaluation report will be produced at the two year stage of the CETL initiative. • Final Evaluation report produced at the end of the 5 year funding period

• Annual reports for University Review committee

Agency conducting evaluation

• GENIE evaluation team (Director, Teaching Fellows and Administrator)

• Project managers

• Outreach co-ordinator and Administrator for outreach events


11

• Administrator and Teaching Fellow for workshops and seminars

• Users of resources etc from the Virtual Genetics Education Centre

As indicated in the framework above, our wide range of activities and projects has meant that a variety of approaches and types of data have been utilised. Evaluation of project work has been

built into the initial planning, depending on the aims and goals for each project. This has been

carried out by the project team. For example, the project ‘Development of DNA structure and sequencing tutorials’ was aimed at providing flexible activities that would facilitate the

understanding of these difficult concepts by second year undergraduates. Evaluation has involved

formative assessments of students before and after the activity, questionnaire feedback from the students after the activity and comparison of summative assessment results in different years

before and after the activities had been introduced. These particular activities were also presented

as a’hands on’ workshop at the 2007 Science Learning and Teaching conference organised by the

HEA science-based subject centres. Formative test feedback and participant questionnaires from this event also formed part of the evaluation data (see CD-ROM-DNA structure and sequencing

tutorials).

When carrying out evaluation activities we have operated within the framework defined by the

University’s Ethical Review Committee. This policy is constantly under review and GENIE’s

Director, as Chair of the Faculty Ethics Review Committee and a member of the University Committee, has actively continued to input into its development. Everyone involved in the

evaluation process (staff, students and members of the general public) have been informed of the

use to which their comments, feedback and any pictures or videos etc. will be put. Processes have

been subject to assessment to consider not only the use of data but also equality, vulnerability of people involved and any possibility of harm ( www.le.ac.uk/genetics/genie )

D2 Reflections on the evaluation process The evaluation process has been a steep learning curve for us but has been immensely valuable.

Two years ago, although we were taking a reflective approach to all of our activities in order to

facilitate development and change, our overall strategy was not structured. This meant that

sometimes our data and evidence didn’t enable us to answer the questions – Have we achieved our goals? How do we know that we have achieved them? How could we do things better? Using

the RUFDATA methodology has meant that we have been able to develop a plan more focussed

on our priorities. This is not to say that data and evidence from the early stages of the CETL programme is not valuable and has not contributed to our strategic planning. The process of the

production of this interim report itself has also been very useful. It has clarified areas of success,

areas that were not anticipated in the original vision and areas that should be the focus for our future strategic planning.

We have reached the stage of evaluation where we have been able to quantify what we have done,

assess success in terms of individual activities and projects and begin to measure impact. For example, numbers of students benefiting, effect of activities on certain areas of student

performance, numbers of staff engaging, impact on the level of pedagogic research, impact on the

production of new strategies and policies etc. However, the difficult challenges lie ahead: How do we know if policies are being implemented? How do we know that publications and presentations

are changing practice? How do we know what is the real impact of the VGEC? How do we know

that input into national debate is actually impacting on national policy?etc ! Our strategy has been to carry out evaluation internally. Although there has been wide participation in the process it is

clear that, as we enter the more difficult stages of evaluation, an external ‘expert’ and ‘critical friend’

would help us with these challenges.


12

E Findings

In the original bid document we outlined projected two and five year outcomes. The two year targets were all enabling things relating to space, getting people in place etc. (see Appendix 7). We

have achieved all of these targets and exceeded them in many cases. Information such as that

included in the Appendices and the CD-ROM is evidence of this. In this section we are looking at our findings in terms of how they have impacted on our seven priority areas. It is much more

difficult to answer the questions: Have we achieved our goal? How do we know we have achieved

it? How could we have done things better? when the goal is, for example, ‘to have impacted on the

student experience’. For each of the seven areas examples are used to illustrate some of the key points and issues.

E1 The Student Experience

Learning spaces A range of flexible learning spaces have been refurbished and equipped using the CETL capital

funds. They include facilities for undergraduates, postgraduates and outreach activities (CD-Rom-Facilities). There are areas for wet laboratory work, computing, tutorials, seminars and group work.

These facilities are spread between two connected buildings; the Adrian building which already

housed existing MSc programmes and the research activities of the Genetics Dept. and the Medical Sciences Building which houses the rest of our teaching facilities. Such prime locations have

facilitated the integration of GENIE activities into the core activities of the Faculty; in particular it has

fostered the synergy between research and teaching that is so pivotal to our philosophy. Many of

the top international geneticists in the Department of Genetics are involved in GENIE activities (Appendix 6) and many of the research students are involved in our student activities ( Appendix 2),

particularly helping with outreach.

The CETL sponsored refurbishment was part of a larger (£6 million) project to refurbish the Adrian

Building which commenced early 2005. During the design of the refurbished teaching spaces a

consultative group was set up including the teaching laboratory manager for the School of Biological sciences, representatives of the demonstrators, technical and academic staff using the

facilities, and representatives from the University Estates Department. This group was proactive

and reflective in designing the spaces and continued working after the start of the refurbishment,

closely co-ordinating with the contractors. Each capital project within the University has a Project Implementation Team (PIT) and the consultative team also communicated with the PIT during the

works. Minutes and notes from these meetings are available which enabled feedback from this

process to also be considered as part of the evaluation as well as use of the facilities. The demonstrators were postgraduate students but in retrospect there should have been a wider

student representation on the consultative group. This has not resulted in major omissions or

problems but some of the attention to detail that had to be carried out after completion could have

been avoided (see student comments below). This was a lesson to be learnt and now two years into the CETL, student involvement across the board is much greater and has become embedded

into our culture (for example, see Appendix 2).

The large undergraduate teaching lab (capacity 150) has been used for the 2005/2006 and

2006/2007 sessions and the postgraduate area, the group teaching rooms and the outreach areas

have been in use for the 2006/2007 session. More than 1,100 postgraduate and undergraduate students and 1,900 school children and adult groups have used the facilities. For all of the teaching

spaces feedback has been sought from students and staff and other users. Summaries of the

feedback from undergraduates, postgraduates and teaching staff can be found on the GENIE

website. Feedback from outreach activities in the form of questionnaire responses was collected for each activity and examples can be found on the CD-ROM- Dynamic DNA and Other Outreach


13

On the whole all teaching spaces have received excellent feedback. Students have enjoyed

working there and they have found that there are now more possibilities for formal and informal

group work. There is increased flexibility for teachers in terms of using combinations of AV

technology in the delivery and design of both practical and tutorial activities and this has benefited the students in terms of their learning ad enjoyment of the sesssions. Equipment is turning out to be

robust and the facilities still look as new after two years. There have been some minor problems

with the lighting, positioning of AV equipment and air conditioning in the labs, most of which could have been avoided if we had consulted more widely with students during the design stage !

Undoubtedly the experience of both students and teaching staff has been improved by the new facilities. Below are some quotes from staff and students.

“The audio visual facilities meant that I could effectively demonstrate techniques ahead of

the students starting experiments.”

“The organisation of the laboratory is so much better. It is light and bright, students can

find things and we have been able to integrate a wider range of experiments because of incubation and refrigeration facilities”.

“I have been able to combine using the internet, video and real demonstrations in my practical classes with over 100 second year students”

Examples of comments from lectrers after teaching first year students in the large undergraduate

laboratory.

“The labs are fantastic, it was easy to see everything that was being demonstrated at the

beginning.”

“It was really helpful to be able to see all of the demonstrations. Last year I didn’t do very

well with my laboratory reports. This year I understand more and I’m hoping to do better”

“I enjoyed working in the practicals, we seemed to have better things to work with than the research labs !”.

Examples of comments from first and second year Biological Sciences undergraduate students

after practical classes in the large undergraduate lab.

“Having the flexibility to have three interconnecting rooms meant that tutors could help

smaller groups with the meiosis exercise and then we could open up the rooms and have presentations to the whole class”.

“Having computers, data projectors and internet access in all of the tutorial rooms enabled

all students to give professional presentations”. Examples of comments from module leaders in Biological Sciences

“There are more rooms now so that it is much easier to get together as a group to prepare for the worksessions”

“We could practice talks before the sessions because we could use powerpoint in all of the rooms”

“It’s a pity that the data projectors in the group rooms weren’t organised so that the same

thing could easily be shown from all three when the partitions were open”. Examples of comments from first year Medical students


14

“The AV equipment would be great if the lights in front of the screens could be switched off

!”

MSc student

“The postgrad. Lab has very good facilities with everything in the same area. The AV

equipment meant that we didn’t have to move to another room for introductory talks.

However, it would have been better if we could have kept the projectors focussed”. Demonstrator in the postgrad. Lab.

Activities

A list of current projects is shown in Appendix 1. Several of the projects have involved the

development of new activities designed to help students to engage with complex concepts or to link

theoretical with practical ideas. An example of the later is the project to design DNA structure and sequencing tutorials, primarily for second year Biological Sciences students. The process used to

evaluate the effectiveness of this project has been outlined in section D1 above. This is a ‘hands

on’ tutorial. Questionnaire feedback indicated that it was very popular with the students. It was clear that they were enjoying it; one student was photographed taking a picture of the DNA model

with her mobile phone so that she could send it to a friend to show what she had been doing !

Students also felt that the tutorial had improved their understanding. This was supported from evidence from formative tests before and after the activity and from the results of module

assessments (Kramer et al 2007 Data can also be found on the CD-ROM – DNA Structure and

Sequencing Tutorial).

Another such project has involved the development of new activities to teach meiosis. This is a

complex cellular process essential for the production of sperms and eggs; an understanding of

which is fundamental to genetics. This has been an example of ‘simple is best’! The original project aim was to produce Flash animations of meiosis so that students could have a three-dimensional

view of what was happening. Nearly three months was spent attempting this with resulting

animations that either wouldn’t work on all the computers available to the students or were

disappointing in their clarity. As an alternative, that could be produced quickly in time for the first year genetics module last session, the project leader produced a set of laminated cards

demonstrating meiosis which could be used by groups of students to follow the process and predict

the genetic variations produced. This proved to be very successful in revising this topic and following focus group feedback and use with the larger class, revisions are being made for use next

session (see CD-ROM- Meiosis tutorial). Leaving us with lessons to learn about balancing

advanced technological applications with simple approaches.

A third example is the development of student-centred problem-based exercises to develop the

skills of experimental design. Working in small groups, students are given a ‘real’ problem to solve

which relates the application fo practical techniques to actual situations encountered in industry, medicine or academic science. Students are presented with an extensive set of researched

options for different approaches at each stage in the experimental design. Rght and wrong

decisions can be taken and there is more than one solution to the problem. The programme gives students not only the opportunity to develop their awareness of experimental design but also to

develop their skills in group interaction, decision-making and communication. We have carried out

research comparing the impact on learning of using this hard copy card exercise with using an on-line version The skill of actually being able to formulate the experiment was not so effectively learnt

by the on-line version, but it was good for learning straightforward information (Cashmore and

hawkridge 2007)

The above are just some examples of projects that have resulted in the development of resources

to aid student learning. Other projects are aimed at improving the student experience in other

ways. For example, the feedback to students project was initiated because our own student surveys and the national student survey (2005) indicated that this was an area that students felt

most dissatisfied with. The project involved a comparison of the views of first year Biological


15

Sciences students and staff and has involved results of questionnaire surveys informing focus

group discussions (Bevan et al 2007) The outcomes of this project have already resulted in

changes to some of our procedures in Biological Sciences and with dissemination through the

Teaching Enhancement Forum and Learning and Teaching committees the results will provide reflective data for other Faculties to consider their practises. The final report of the project will be

available on the GENIE website

(www.le.ac.uk/genetics/genie) for the 2007/2008 session.

The GENIE Student Network Two years ago it was very clear that our major aim was to improve the student experience but we

had not focussed on how direct student involvement in planning and activities could help us to

achieve that goal. However, there are now a growing number of collaborative projects between staff

and students and the students themselves have taken a proactive role and have established a GENIE student network involving undergraduates and postgraduates (see Appendix 2). They were

motivated both by information about GENIE that they had gained from our own literature, articles in

University publications and the website(see CD-ROM- GENIE in the University News), and by information from the national student CETL network that was passed on by staff, evidence of the

effectiveness of our internal dissemination strategy.

One particular area in which students have become involved is outreach. There are currently 49

undergraduates and postgraduates from Biological Sciences and Medicine who are involved in

developing activities or demonstrating on the day. Training is provided by GENIE staff and the

University’s Widening Participation Department. Through these extracurricular activities students have developed a range of skills which have enriched their overall experience. These skills include

scientific, organisational, teaching, time management, to name but a few. (see CD-ROM-Dynamic

DNA, Other Outreach, summer Schools). Below are some quotes from students involved in activities this year.

‘ I was terrified at the thought of nearly 300 14 year olds being in the labs at the same time,

but it worked and was great fun.’

‘I was demonstrating an activity to show genetic diversity. I got a real buzz from it because

the kids and the teachers were really attentive and wanted to know’.

‘This was the second time that I have been involved with Dynamic DNA, its exciting and has

made me think again about going into teaching’. Quotes from undergraduate students after demonstrating on Dynamic DNA, a ‘hands on’

experience day for 13-15 year olds

‘The members of the rotary club found everything interesting, It tested my ability to explain things simply, they seemed to understand and just wanted to hear more.

‘The evening went really quickly, I wished we had more time. They enjoyed working in the lab and really appreciated our time’.

Quotes from PhD students following and evening Rotary Club visit.

E2 Effects on Teachers Reward and recognition Involvement with GENIE CETL has led to reward and recognition for staff. The Director and other

members of the original core team have all received promotion in recognition of their work with

GENIE. Other members of the team (Jon Scott-2006 and Jo Badge-2007) have been recognised by


16

the award of the title ‘University Teaching Fellow’ and Chris Willmott, one of the original core

members, was awarded ‘National Teaching Fellow’ in 2005.

There has been a significant change within the institution over the last two years with regards to the recognition of teaching and learning (see E5 below). Overall there are more promotions based on

achievements in learning and teaching and criteria for promotions, including professorial level, have

been redefined and are in the process of being formalised. This correlates with GENIE’s work within the relevant committees etc. but it is difficult to provide direct evidence. However, the

interviews with the Vice-Chancellor indicates that he sees GENIE has having played a significant

role in these changes.

Staff Development

GENIE has facilitated and promoted continuing professional development at various levels. The

GENIE Teaching Fellows are all registered for the Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice In Higher Education organised by the University’s Staff Development Department. One of the Fellows

is also continuing his part time, distance-learning MA in Education at Durham University. Also

attendance and involvement at workshops and conferences is encouraged and funded both for GENIE associated staff (see Appendix 3) and for other staff upon application, which are considered

by the management committee.

GENIE has also promoted and facilitated reflection and research of teaching methods and

approaches. This is quite a change in culture for many, particularly those at the cutting edge of

subject specific laboratory research. It was often the case that individuals were enthusiastic about

teaching and would have new ideas but not the time to develop them. Also the area of pedagogic research and development was not always taken seriously. GENIE has provided the space and

support in terms of people to help development. Also the funding of the CETL programme has

resulted in a wider acceptance of teaching and learning as an academic discipline it its own right. This is clear from some of the interviews we are carrying out with members of staff in relation to

their perceptions of the role of the CETLs. This is an ongoing project with 27 interviews carried ot

todate, some of which are included on the CD-ROM to illustrate some of the points made. It was

interesting to note that some people interviewed still do not have any real idea what pedagogic research is. It is clear that, although our dissemination activities have had some success, there is

still some work to do (see CD-ROM -examples of structured interviews with staff ).

Research

It is clear form the large number of publications and presentations, made by GENIE staff and

resulting from funded projects, that GENIE is making a significant impact on research into teaching and learning (Appendix 1). Funding of projects has resulted in new opportunities. We have also

established a pedagogic research group within Biological Sciences to promote informal discussion

of ideas and findings. Also, at Leicester, in collaboration with the other two CETLs based in

Geography and Physics, and the Beyond Distance Research Alliance (www.le.ac.uk/beyonddistance), we have launched a new electronic journal; JeTL –Journal for

Excellence in Teaching and Learning, ( www.le2.ac.uk/projects/cetls/JETL ). This journal offers

opportunities for staff to obtain peer review of reports of innovations and research prior to publication, it also offers publication opportunities and authors choose at what stage and whether or

not their work is limited to Leicester or has worldwide visibility.

Development of resources and approaches

Opportunities have arisen from the capital development of new teaching spaces, the availability of

new equipment and the availability of support for projects. In relation to the student experience

(section E1 above) we gave some examples of how the capital development of new teaching spaces had impacted on both staff and students. The most notable opportunities afforded by the

space arise from its flexibility structurally and in relation to the audio visual technologies available.

In section E3 below there are examples of how some of the new equipment has stimulated new activities.


17

Teachers have the opportunity to use the materials or information from the range of the GENIE

projects. Reports from the projects and how any resources produced have been used, are

publicised through Boards of Studies, the pedagogic research group, the Teaching Enhancement

Forum, by publicity through University bulletins and websites and through presentations (see Appendix 8). This has resulted in some resources being widely used for example, the educational

videos for demonstrating lab techniques such as the ‘Pipetting’ video which was won a gold award

and prize for best in its category at the 2007 international Health and Sciences Communication conference held at Toronto in Canada in June of this year. Publicising the award increased

requests for use within and beyond the University (CD-ROM educational videos). We have kept a

record of the use of all resources and we have received some feedback. However, we have not been as efficient as we could have been in chasing this up. More feedback would clearly help with

development of resources. All of our resources and outcomes of project work will be available on

the Virtual Genetics Education Centre. Therefore they will be available world-wide. When this is

launched in the Autumn of this year it will have built into it a mechanism for obtaining and chasing up feedback and this is something that we will be monitoring.

E3 Teaching and Learning Activities As outlined above the new teaching spaces and project work have afforded new opportunities to

develop new activities and have encouraged the use of new technologies. An inventory, location

and booking procedure for all equipment is available on the GENIE website www.le.ac.uk/genetics/genie .

One of the successes of the work of our web developer Jo Badge (part funded by the University) is

the increased use of Blackboard. All modules within Biological Sciences and all programmes within the University now use the learning environment and this has been helped by dissemination

through Faculty and University Teaching and Learning Committees, the Teaching Enhancement

Forum and publication and presentation of specific projects (see Appendices 8 and 3). One particular ongoing project involves the development of short videos and video clips which support

and extend module materials and are available on Blackboard for students to use (see CD-ROM-

Examples of other projects). Another involves the development of on-line assessments for first

year modules which is a collaboration with students to facilitate continuous formative assessment and input into module assessments in Biological Sciences (Rust, 2002). It is currently being

developed for trial with a Biochemistry module (see Appendix 1). These assessments will be made

available via Blackboard

IMPALA 3 ( www.impala.ac.uk ) is a project which is being carried out in collaboration with Gilly

Salmon, Professor in e-learning involves medical students working on a Genetics special study module in the production of podcasts giving information to other students about some of the ethical

issues arising from approaches in the field. Examples of some of the first attempt at these can also

be heard on the CD-ROM- Examples of other projects.

One particular example of new equipment is the ‘Keepad voting system’ which can potentially add

an extra interactive dimension to lectures, groupwork, assessment and feedback. To date we have

used this in various activities during the Summer Schools which have just taken place in July. In one session various ethical dilemmas were posed to the students who put themselves in the place

of an ethics committee and used the system to record their opinions. On the same occasion the

system was used to gain instant feedback from participants using the ‘voting system’ to anonymously record their views (see CD-ROM-Summer Schools) it will be interesting to see how

feedback obtained at the end of the Summer School correlates with these results. After organising

a training session for the use of the equipment (attended by 15 people) there are now several plans

for its use in the new term.


18

In terms of the use and design of new activities the VGEC should play a key role, making actitivities

accessible and easy to use and providing a stimulus for new ideas and a vehicle for testing them

out.

E4 Impact on Curricula and Programme Development New Modules

GENIE has already impacted on the provision of modules within both Biological Sciences and the Medical School. A module for second year medical Genetics students, ‘Current Issues in Medical

Genetics’ has expanded its aims and objectives to take a broader look at the ethical issues with

new activities, discussion topics and forms of assessment. A new Biological Sciences module focussed on introducing students to the practical ways of analysing information about genomes was

launched for the 2005 session and a new medical school special study module ‘Genetics and

Research’ launched in 2006. Further details can be found on the GENIE website www.le.ac.uk/genetics/genie . Feedback to date on these modules has been good with some

comments on timetabling and length of modules, possibilities to resolve these are being

investigated for the new session.

For the 2008 session there are further plans. These include a new Biological Sciences module

‘Perceptions of Science - Public Understanding and Awareness’. This is an exciting project. It will

be a third year module and the content and curriculum Is being developed with a team including both staff and students. Members of the GENIE team are also involved in the redesign of the 4 year

MBChB graduate entry programme for Health Scientists, being part of the programme team,

developing a new first year module ‘Molecules, Genes and Disease’ and co-ordinating integration of genetics into later clinical phases of the course.

New Masters programmes

Building on our MSc in Molecular Genetics we have developed an expanded taught MSc programme, which currently has 3 additional streams, Cancer Cell and Molecular Biology,

Molecular Pathology and Toxicology and Infection and Immunity. This is an overarching flexible

Faculty programme with the different courses sharing facilities, modules and teachers. The refurbishment of the new postgraduate laboratory has enabled this expansion. This is an exciting

undertaking, two years ago our student numbers on the Molecular Genetics programme were

approximately 30 per year. For the 2007/8 session recruitment will be in the order of 100. Current

facilities will allow further expansion to 150. The University has provided resources for a Senior Teaching Fellow (Chris Cane) to co-ordinate and develop the postgraduate curricula and oversee

quality assurance. Chris is working as an associate member of GENIE and is developing projects

in the field of pedagogy relating to taught masters programmes in collaboration with Nick Tate, Director of the SPLINT CETL at Leicester. This programme is significant for the University’s

strategy to grow in this area (CD-ROM-Interviews senior management- Kevin Lee, University

Postgraduate Dean).

E5 Strategic Impact within the Institution Before we can have significant impact within the institution it is important that the work of GENIE is

recognised and supported. The University is very supportive of GENIE and the CETL initiative

generally. As well as reports of GENIE activities appearing in numerous newsletters on the website etc. the University has acknowledged the importance it places on the work of GENIE by highlighting

it in publications which are disseminated widely outside of the institution, including annual reports,

degree day programmes and presentations to University Senate, Council and Court. Of particular

note is this year’s Vice Chancellor’s presentation to University Court where areas of work across the University were highlighted and seven people given particular mention including Dr Annette

Cashmore for her work as Director of GENIE (see Appendix 8 and CD-ROM – GENIE in the

University News ).The University also gives a high profile to GENIE to many visitors to the University who are often given the opportunity to visit the facilities and meet with staff. Visitors


19

have included The Government Minister for Higher Education, Members of the European

Parliament, Lord Lieutenants of Rutland and Leciestershire, Officials from the East Midlands

Development Agency, Mayors, Local Councillors, HEFCE and HEA officials as well as numerous

local headteachers and representatives of local industry and commerce (also see Appendix 8) All of these are informal evidence of the strategic importance that the institution continues to give to

GENIE

Input of University to Sustainability of GENIE

Significant evidence of the support for and recognition of GENIE is the input that has already been

given for sustainability beyond the initial funding period. The positions of the Director and the three Teaching Fellows have been made permanent (subject to probation where appropriate) and the

University has also contributed to the salary costs of the Web Developer and has provided

dedicated support for finance management from within the University’s finance Department.

Infrastructure support in terms of the provision of space for the capital development of the GENIE Centre and teaching facilities and a commitment to maintaining this infrastructure is further

evidence of the importance that the University places on GENIE.

GENIE impact on strategies

Many members of the GENIE team play active roles in key University committees and working

groups. These include, Senate, Teaching and Learning, Staffing, Programme Reivew, Equal Opportunities, Careers working group, Widening Participation. This level of involvement is

essential if real impact on strategy is to be made. We have already had impact of policies and

strategies including the learning and teaching strategy, the e-learing strategy, the strategy for

implementation of personal development planning, the employability strategy and the widening participation strategy. GENIE has been instrumental in the establishment of the Teaching

Enhancement Forum and the Director is a member of the core team of TEF, setting the agenda and

focus for teaching and learning activities each year. Informal evidence for the impact of our involvement across all of these areas can be found on the CD-ROM- Interviews with Senior

Management.

A key issue in relation to learning and teaching is reward and recognition. Embedding change in this area is an important role for the CETLs. Particularly in research intensive institutions promotion

criteria are often biased towards research activities and even when learning and teaching criteria

are included the difficulty in defining excellence in these areas becomes a barrier. One of our recently initiated projects, in collaboration with the HEA, is aimed at surveying reward and

recognition policies for UK institutions, investigating the extent of implementation of the policies and

using our findings to inform the sector, facilitate the sharing of good practice and promote change in general policy. In section E2 above we reported the reward and recognition that had been given to

staff for input into GENIE and outlined the way in which the University of Leicester is developing its

policies in this area in relation to teaching and learning (again see CD-ROM interviews with senior

management).

Other areas of strategic impact are related to GENIE’s work in the area of student recruitment and

projects relating to the taught postgraduate experience which are growing and developing as a result of our connections and collaborations with internal and external partners ( See Sections E6

and E7).

E6 Connections with Internal Partners

Through dissemination within the institution (Appendix 8) GENIE has made numerous connections with other partners across the University. These include the other CETLs (SPLINT which is based

in Geography and collaborative with University College London and Nottingham University and PI,

based in Physics and a collaboration with the Open University). The directors of all three CETLs

meet regularly on an informal basis at Leicester and through activities of the East Midlands CETL


20

Network and more formally through the University CETLs Strategy Committee. These interactions

have proved fruitful, and collaborative projects between them are being initiated. For example, a

joint project with SPLINT to investigate the particular challenges and issues for taught Masters

programmes and the ‘Imagining Higher Education Seminar series ‘(see Appendix 4) to look at some of these issues across the institution. GENIE was involved with SPLINT and the Staff

Development Department in an initiative to work with consultants for the HEA developing

questionnaires for students on masters programmes nationally and there is feedback and a summary report of this work www.le.ac.uk/genetics/genie . GENIE has worked with staff

Development on other projects (see Appendix 1) and has received information, help and advice on

the development of the evaluation strategy.

Other collaborations have already been referred to including those with the Beyond Distance

Research Alliance and the Teaching Enhancement Forum. We have also worked with the Student

Support and Development Services www.le.ac.uk/ssds/index.html (CD-ROM-interview with senior management staff, Paul Jackson, Head of SSDS) and with Undergaduate Admissions. GENIE has

been involved with planning, organising and participating in Open days and events for the

University and the Faculty. For example in January 2007 the University held a Conference for Teachers and Advisors. With154 attendees. GENIE was involved in planning and taking part on the

day. Data from the feedback report (see the GENIE website) indicated that the event was a great

success. The aim had been to convince attendees to recommend Leicester and many reported in the feedback that they would. A similarly successful event was held in June 2007. This was an

Open day for Medicine with over 1,400 attendees. GENIE had led the planning provided a range of

‘hands on’ activities throughout the day and engaged 50 undergraduate students as guides. The

impact of such events on student numbers will only be known through admissions data for forthcoming years

E7 Connections with External Partners The national CETL email network has been very useful for making connections with other CETLs and finding out about workshops etc and is a good vehicle for disseminating the work and findings

of CETLs. In addition over the last two years we have developed connections and interactions with

a wide range of external partners. Some of these have led to major collaborative projects and/or activities and others are at the stage of being vehicles for dissemination with future potential

(Appendix 8). Our continuing connection with the HEA Subject Centre for the Biosciences has been

particularly helpful. They are represented on our management committee and have provided useful

guidance on planning for evaluation and dissemination. They have produced a booklet summarising the work of all of the CETLs with Biosciences connections

(www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk ) and have involved GENIE members in a range of workshops

and discussion groups aimed at producing strategic reports (Appendix 3). Below we have outlined particular activities and networks that illustrate our growing external connections.

Outreach Many external connections have come through our outreach to schools and colleges and activities

to raise public awareness and engagement in science. These have become a larger part of our

work than originally anticipated partly because the additional capital from HEFCE enabled the

refurbishment of two labs connected by a group computer working room (total capacity 100) dedicated to such activities. Also careful timetabling and help from the central technical teaching

team as meant that we have been able to dovetail use of the large undergraduate laboratory for

outreach activities on occasions, enabling activities where up to 300 visitors can participate at any one time. (see Appendix 5 for the range of activities to date and CD-ROM-Dynamic DNA, Other

Outreach and Summer Schools for examples of feedback, slideshows and videos).

We have continue with our work experience programmes and each year approximately 34 year 10

and 11 students spend up to two weeks in the Department of Genetics gaining experience working

in the laboratories alongside scientists of all levels. These have proved successful in terms of


21

giving an introduction not only to working in a lab but also in providing experience of Higher

Education in general.

Our programmes of Summer Schools and Taster Days have also expanded (see CD-ROM –

Summer Schools). In addition we now also operate a range of other activities and visits. These

include ‘hands on’ day visits for sixth forms, ‘Dynamic DNA’ events for 200-300 13-15 year olds to experience first hand the applications of work with DNA ( pictures and examples of feedback data

are on the CD-ROM-Dynamic DNA), and a programme of visits out to schools and colleges. We

are now establishing growing contacts with science teachers in schools, facilitating a mutually helpful dialogue concerning curricula and transition as part of the student experience. We have

been working closely with the University’s Departments of Widening Participation and Lifelong

Learning and developing good collaborations with CULN (The Colleges, University of Leicester

Network www.le.ac.uk/ad/culn ) which is an active network of regional sixth form, further and higher education colleges working closely together with the University of Leicester.

We have also hosted several visits of adult groups from the community who want to hear about research activities and the applications of genetics, and to have the opportunity to carry out some

’hands on’ activities.

One of our projects, ‘Genetics in the Community’, involves a collaboration with the Clinical Genetics Department at the Leicester Royal Infirmary aimed at raising the awareness of genetics in

a range of ethnic minority communities where the use of the Clinical Genetics services is low. In

fact, genetics from a multicultural and multi faith perspective has become a theme of much of our

work related to the public understanding and awareness of science. For example, the Launde Abbey workshop ‘Genetics, Science and Society’ was attended by a wide range of members of

different faith and cultural backgrounds engaging in active discussions, participants in GENIE

‘hands on’ evenings have included the Christian/Muslim Women’s group, and we are embarking on projects with the nationally renowned St Philip’s Centre for Study and Engagement in a Multi Faith

Society based in Leicester. (Outreach activities and events undertaken by GENIE are shown in

Appendix 5 and on the CD-ROM- Summer Schools, Dynamic DNA and Other Outreach.

CULN (Colleges, University of Leicester Network www.le.ac.uk/as/culn )

AS mentioned above this is an active network aimed at promoting interaction and collaboration

between regional sixth form, further and higher education colleges and the University of Leicester. In addition to organising and hosting outreach events we are developing a growing involvement in

other areas. GENIE has initiated the setting up of a special interest group within the network for the

area of Biological Sciences. The GENIE Director has joined the ‘CULN Champions’ network which meets regularly to discuss pertinent issues affecting our institutions or further and higher education

generally such as the Leitch Report (2006) www.hm-

treasury.gov.uk/media/6/4/leitch_finalreport051206.pdf and work- based learning.

GENIE has developed particular collaborations with Newman College of Higher Education in

Birmingham . A large part of the college’s provision is teacher training and we have embarked on a

joint project ‘The communication of the Nature of Science in the Classroom’.

East Midlands CETL Network

There are nine CETLs in the East Midlands region based at the Universities of Leicester, Loughborough, Nottingham and Nottingham Trent. We have joined together in a proactive and

productive network. The foci of these CETLs are broad. However, we have identified key themes

important for all of us. These are embedding change, employability, enhancement of the learning

experience and pedagogy, enterprise, innovation, student support and retention and outreach and widening participation. These are all central to improving the student experience. We meet

regularly, usually every two months in order to share experiences and report on progress. We held

an event in June 2006 to launch the East Midlands Network. This was attended by over 100 people representing the universities, regional and local government, local companies, HEFCE and

the HEA. This event was successful at disseminating information about the network within


22

institutions and beyond and was accompanied by a report outlining our priorities and philosophy.

This event has been successful in generating some contacts, for example with the East Midlands

Development Agency. GENIE is currently in communication with EMDA regarding future funding for

developing CPD programmes building on our Masters programmes.

We are now establishing working groups looking at activities and possibilities in each of the key

themes. To date active groups in the areas of pedagogic research and outreach have been established and are holding regular workshops. Specific meetings focussing on evaluation

(Loughborough engETL, February 2007) and Reward and Recognition (Leicester GENIE CETL,

April 2007) have been held and it is anticipated that working groups in these areas will also develop. In March 2007 the network presented its work and philosophy at the ‘Market Place’ at the

Annual CETLs workshop in Warwick. Presentations, publications and further information can be

found on the CD-Rom-East Midlands CETLs

Workshops and semnars

Other external connections are being made through our programme of workshops and seminars. At

the time of the original bid we had already begun to establish a National Network of Stakeholders in Genetics to discuss priority areas in the field, provide opportunities to share good practice and

ideas between people involved in delivering Genetics programmes and promoting Genetics

education. Two years ago we had eight institutions involved in this developing programme. This has now grown to fifteen. As part of this programme we have held two workshops since 2005 ‘The

virtual Genetics Education Centre-how can you be involved?’ and ‘Genetics, Science and Society-

a Multi-Faith Approach’ . ( www.le.ac.uk/genetics/genie ) This is an area that now needs more

activity. We have planned a programme of workshops for the Network for the next two years and the launch of the Virtual Genetics Education Centre will certainly facilitate this.

Other workshops and seminars have included East Midlands CETLs activities and also the ‘Imagining Higher Education’ series of seminars focussed on the pedagogy of the taught masters

experience which is being hosted in collaboration with SPLINT CETL and Staff Development at

Leicester. (see Appendix 4).

A recently initiated project ‘Reward and Recognition in UK HEIs’ is an aspect of our work which is

an example where we have potential for national impact on policy and strategy. We are initiating a

collaboration with Lee Harvey, Research Director, HEA in this area. Aother example of external contacts leading to input into national policy is our work with the NHS Centre for Genetics

Education ( www.geneticseducation.nhs.uk ), based in Birmingham and funded by the Department

of Health. GENIE has been involved in working groups with the Centre to discuss a common curriculum for genetics in medicine and assessment models. GENIE’s Director has also been

invited to take part in a strategic planning meeting in London, October 2007 the outcomes of which

are to form the basis of a report to the DoH on future directions of genetics education in the Health

Service.

F Lessons Learned and Future Adjustments

F1 Successes, Surprises and Balance of Activities The self evaluation exercise outlined in this report has been a useful in several respects. Pulling

together data and evidence has given clarity to the picture of where GENIE is two years on. Our

goals are the same as in the original bid, but self evaluation has shown us what is working and

what is not and it has identified areas where there has been more activity than expected and areas where there has been less. It has helped us to consider why this change in emphasis has occurred

and whether or not it is appropriate to our goals. Project work has expanded both in terms of the

projects led by GENIE staff and in terms of collaborative projects and projects funded through


23

bursaries or small project funding. There are currently a total number of 17 active projects against a

predicted number of 4-6. This reflects the breadth of enthusiasm for pedagogical reflection which

had just been waiting for resources, support and a framework in which to carry it out. GENIE has

provided that for some people. However, we would like to see GENIE providing support for a much wider constituency. Some of our projects are in collaboration with other Departments but it could be

more. Other Departments are benefiting indirectly through our work by dissemination of good

practices and the impact of our influence on strategies and policies relating to teaching and learning. However, we would like to see more direct impact through changes in programmes,

curricula and teaching approaches and designs.

Outreach and activities to raise public awareness of science are also a much larger part of our work

than was outlined in the original bid. This is due in part to the facilities afforded by the extra capital

funding and in part by the momentum which has been gained from success. Almost 2,000 people

have now been involved in one or more or our activities. We have been successful in giving people fun whilst improving their understanding as judged by feedback questionnaires. There is also some

anecdotal evidence that the experience has had a positive influence in contributing to decisions to

enter higher education. However, further evidence is needed to be able to confirm this. Towards this end, in collaboration with the Widening Participation Department at Leicester, from this year we

will be involved in a project to collect tracking data for all of our sixth form activities.

The East Midlands CETLs network has been an unexpected positive outcome and is a source of

external collaboration that will facilitate consideration of the overarching CETL related themes such

as reward and recognition, pedagogic reflection and overall impact on the student experience.

GENIE has been proactive in establishing this and some of our workshops and seminars have been related to EM Network activities. Other workshops have been local and others organised for

the National Network of Stakeholders in Genetics. We would have liked to have held more

workshops for this group and on reflection it is probably this area that has been reduced as a consequence of increased outreach activities. It will be important to rebalance this as part of our

future planning in order to increase momentum with the National Network. We now have a planned

programme for the next two years.

F2 Teaching Practices and Enrichment of the Student Experience The funding of GENIE has enabled the refurbishment of new teaching facilities and the

development of new resources and approaches. This includes hands on resources for teaching

difficult concepts in molecular biology as well as novel packages for group work to teach the skills of experimental design. These skills are important for all disciplines because they develop higher

level cognitive abilities through the processes of rational thinking and logic. Part of this later project

has been to compare differences in learning when on line versions are used as compared to hard copy packages used by groups. The findings from this work will be applicable to a wide range of

disciplines particularly relevant as more and more on line resources and approaches are used.

Evidence suggests that all of this work has improved the student experience, even if we have learnt

lessons along the way, such as when to use simple approaches, and when new technology is going to enrich the student experience. It has also enabled us to be more adventurous, try new things and

encourage others to do the same. The making and use of educational videos to demonstrate

laboratory techniques has been successful with a large demand for use and good feedback from the students. The professionalism with which they were designed and made has been recognised

by an international awards which helps with the dissemination of the work of GENIE. We are also

trying a range of other activities such as the use of teacher and student made video clips, podcasts, online assessments and more hands on tutorials. This variation in teaching designs results in a

enrichment in the diversity of approaches that are used and, consequently, can only be a help in

our endeavour to match the diversity of learning needs of the students. More direct involvement of

students is essential if we are to optimise the enrichment of the wide student experience. Our internal dissemination strategy has been successful, at least at one level, because students have

found out about GENIE and been proactive in setting up a GENIE student network. This is

facilitating student involvement in a growing range of activities including projects, looking at


24

feedback, assessment and plagiarism in the broader context of academic integrity, curriculum

development and outreach.

New projects that are just being initiated address some of the wider issues relating to the student experience. Globalisation of Higher Education is an important consideration and the international

nature of the student body and cultural diversity is a part of the student experience that is growing

in importance (Teichler U (2004). In collaboration with Staff Development we are taking part in a project to include consideration of internationalisation in teaching practices. Multi cultural and multi

faith considerations have become an unexpected theme through some of work. The Launde Abbey

conference, Genetics , Science and Society- a Multi Faith perspective has led to collaborations with the Faith Communities in Leicester, some of whom are already contributing to our work relating to

internationalisation in Higher Education.

Students in Biological Sciences and Medicine remain the main cohorts benefiting from GENIE facilities. Undergraduate numbers across the Faculty have increased over the last two years by

approximately 27%l. However, it is difficult to determine the precise contribution that GENIE itself

has played in this. We have, however, been proactive in planning and taking part in successful visits and Open Days and therefore can take some of the credit. However, in relation to

postgraduate recruitment, our development and expansion of a Faculty-wide MSc programme is

itself already significantly increasing student numbers (30% over two years). Correlating with our activity in this area the research into the postgraduate student experience is particularly timely.

Expansion in the area of taught postgraduate programmes is important for the University’s long

term planning and demonstrates our engagement with the University’s strategic planning.

F3 GENIE as a Vehicle of Change Embedding change was one of the key overarching aims of the CETL initiative in general. One area

is clearly in relation to teaching developments and curriculum developments. However, another is in

relation to strategy and policy change. In order to be successful in this respect, a first stage is to be successful in dissemination throughout the institution. We have certainly had a high profile in the

news within the institution and recognition from senior management. However, interviewing a

range of staff across the institution has thrown up a few surprises. Staff within Genetics, even

international scientific researchers are aware of GENIE’s activities, the breadth if not the depth. However, as we interviewed staff from other disciplines, it became clear that although everyone

had heard of CETLs, their knowledge of GENIE in particular was variable. This is a recently

initiated project. To date we have interviewed 27 members of staff and postgraduates and examples of the transcipts of a selection are included on the CD-ROM-interviews with staff and we

are continuing with the interviews. The process of these interviews themselves is raising the profile!

We have already stated above that we intend to increase the constituency of people involved in GENIE projects and reconsideration of our internal dissemination will be a start to this. Despite this

we have had impact on strategies and policies through our work on strategic committees etc. This

is supported by the views of senior management. In particular reward and recognition is a key

issue if teaching and learning is to be considered alongside subject specific research activities. Our recently initiated research into current policies and their implementation in the UK is very timely and

collaboration with the HEAcademy will facilitate the national impact of this research. Our

connections with other external partners are of prime importance if our potential for wider impact is to be realised. This will be high on our agenda.

GENIE has met its two year targets, but now the challenges really start. To date targets have been related to getting things going, changing local practices etc. However, the five year targets go

beyond ‘enabling’ goals to evaluation of impact locally and nationally. To date our evaluation

strategy has been to have an internal team co-ordinating the evaluation. However, a future

adjustment will be to engage an external evaluator as an advisor and ’critical friend’ to adjust our evaluation strategies. We know we need to adjust our activities as we move into the next phase.

We need to make sure that when developing resources we consider the simple as well as the

advanced technological approaches. We need to ensure that student involvement grows with


25

contributions to all aspects of our work. It is important that we now look carefully at the balance of

our activities to ensure we can meet our targets. These longer term targets are to increase local,

regional and national impact. To succeed, our dissemination strategy needs to meet all of its

intended audiences. The outward face of GENIE is the priority for the next three years. We have sustainability beyond this, because of investment by the University, but we also need to secure

further external funding. We need to extend our network of external contacts in order to effectively

disseminate our findings and to work collaboratively with them in order to impact positively on national strategies and policies.

F4 The CETL Initiative

There has been some questioning of the CETL initiative as an effective vehicle of change for the wider HE sector. However, it is not the stage to judge this. The initiative has only been going for two

years, during this time aims have to have been related to getting structures in place and effecting

local change. The networks and contacts developing extend beyond CETLs and it is these

networks that will facilitate national change. By investing in centres that were already demonstrating excellence is a good strategy. The level of investment involved has meant that big waves rather

than small ripples can be made, people and institutions have been made to take notice and the

profile of teaching and learning in the academic professions has certainly been raised. This is our experience and I am confident that the formative evaluation across CETLs at this stage will echo

our findings. Institutions that don’t have CETLs are bound to not feel as confident but the waves

will be coming their way.


26

Bibliography and References

Badge JL & Cann AJ (2005) e-Learning versus e-Teaching: Seeing the Pedagogic Wood for the Technological Trees. Bioscience Education E-Journal 5, 6. Bevan, R., Scott, J., Cann, A., Willmott C. & Badge, J. Putting focus into student feedback. HEA Bioscience Meeting; Oxford Brookes University, 2007. Burke PJ & Dunn S (2006) Communicating science: exploring reflexive pedagogical approaches. Teaching in Higher Education 11 (2), 219 Cashmore, A. Hawkridge, D., Kramer, C., and Suter-Giorgini, N. Student-centred problem-based group exercises in molecular biology. Proceedings of the Science Learning and Teaching Conference (2007), pp. 227-228. ISBN: 978-1-905788-39-2. Cohen L, Manion L & Morrison K (2007) Research Methods in Education. Routledge. Dolmans DHJM & Schmidt HG (2006) What Do We Know About Cognitive and Motivational Effects of Small Group Tutorials in Problem-Based Learning?. Advances in Health Sciences Education 11 (4), 321 Hockings C (2005) Removing the barriers? A study of the conditions affecting teaching innovation. Teaching in Higher Education 10(3), 313-326. Kahn P & O’Rourke K (2004) Guide to curriculum design: Enquiry based learning. Higher Education Academy http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=359 Kempa RF & Ayob A (1995) Learning from group-work in science. International Journal of Science Education. 17, 341-354. Kramer, C., Barber, R., Cashmore, A., Dalgliesh, R., Suter-Giogini, N., and Willmott, C. (2007) Linking DNA structure and sequencing using model based learning. Proceedings of the Science Learning and Teaching Conference (2007), pp. 107-109. ISBN: 978-1-905788-39-2. Leathwood C & Phillips D (2000) Developing curriculum evaluation research in higher education: Process, politics and practicalities. Higher Education 40 (3), 313-330 Leitch S (2006) Prosperity for all in the global economy-world class skills

(www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/6/4/leitch_finalreport051206.pdf Pickard J (2006) Staff and student attitudes to plagiarism at University College Northampton. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 31, 215-232. Race P (2005) Making Learning Happen. A guide for post-compulsory education. Routledge Rust C (2002) The impact of assessment on student learning. Active Learning in Higher Education 3, 145-158. Saunders M. (2005) Beginning an evaluation with RUFDATA: theorising a practical approach to evaluation planning. Evaluation 6 (1), 7-21. Steinert Y (2004) Student perceptions of effective small group teaching. Medical Education 38 (3), 286–293 Teichler U (2004) The Changing Debate on Internationalisation of Higher Education. Higher Education 48 (1), 5-26 Weaver MR (2006) Do students value feedback? Student’s perceptions of tutor’s written responses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 31, 379-394.


27

Appendix 1 Current GENIE Projects

Undergraduate Practical Resources for Analysis of the Human Genome

Project Leader: Dr Raymond Dalgleish

Development of a new practical to introduce modern techniques of genome analysis for second

year undergraduates.

Design of resources for first year Meiosis Tutorial

Project Leader: Dr Nicola Suter-Giorgini

A card-based tutorial for first year undergraduates to allow students to develop a better

understanding of the mechanisms of meiosis and their importance in generation of genetic

diversity. Further details of this project, materials, evaluations etc., can be found on the

accompanying CD-ROM

DNA Structure and Sequencing Tutorial

Project Leaders: Dr Cas Kramer & Dr Ruth Barber

This project, aimed at second year undergraduates, has two strands: the first uses model building

to improve students’ understanding of DNA structure, and the second involves a simulation of the

processes used in DNA sequence analysis. . Further details of these projects, materials,

evaluations etc., can be found on the accompanying CD-ROM

Development of Student-centred Problem-based Group Exercises: Small Group Teaching on

a Large Scale

Project Leaders: Dr Annette Cashmore & Prof. David Hawkridge

Small group teaching is extremely costly in terms of staff time. This project is developing and

assessing resources which allow students to work in small groups to solve problems. This enables

a single tutor to effectively deliver small group teaching to classes of 80 or more students.

Research has been carried out to compare the impact on student learning ofthe use of the

materials for group work compared to the use of on-line versions

Educational Videos

Project Leaders: Dr Cas Kramer & Dr Nicola Suter-Giorgini

GENIE is developing a series of short educational videos covering common molecular biology

laboratory techniques. The production of these is in collaboration with the University of Leicester

Audiovisual Services Unit. Two videos have been produced so far covering pipetting and gel

electrophoresis. The videos are aimed at undergraduate and postgraduate students and can be

viewed on DVD or as streaming media on Blackboard. The pipetting video won two awards at the

2007 HeSCA Meeting in Toronto. Both of the finished videos can be viewed on the accompanying

CD-ROM where further details of the awards can also be found.


28

Genetics in the Community (In collaboration with the Department of Clinical Genetics.)

Project Leaders: Dr Cas Kramer & Ms Heena Patel

This project is concerned with investigating factors which reduce uptake of clinical genetics

services amongst ethnic minority communities, with the aim of promoting an improved

understanding of genetics.

Student Science Helps Health Scheme (In collaboration with Aimhigher East Midlands,

Healthcare strand.)

Project Leader: Dr Cas Kramer

This outreach project is aimed specifically at young male pupils in the East Midlands to give them

opportunities to examine science career options in the Health sector.

The Efficacy of Feedback in the First Year Programme

Project Leader: Dr Jon Scott

Feedback is important in allowing students to improve their performance in coursework, particularly

in the first year when students can struggle to understand exactly what is expected in assignments.

This project is aimed at investigating types of feedback offered to students, looking at the way in

which students use this information and comparing staff and student perceptions of feedback.

Moving beyond Plagiarism Detection towards a Culture of Academic Integrity

Project Leader: Dr Jo Badge

Plagiarism, whilst always a problem, has become more of an issue with students cutting and

pasting from web resources, and when students work in groups. This project addresses this

problem from by giving students a clear view of what constitutes plagiarism and by instilling good

academic practice and how to avoid it. A key aim is to involve students in developing a culture of

academic integrity.

IMPALA3 (In collaboration with Beyond Distance Research Alliance.)

Project Leader: Dr Chris Cane & Dr Annette Cashmore

The IMPALA (Informal Mobile Podcasting and Learning Adaptation) project is working towards

innovative use of podcasting and mobile media in teaching, supported by a sound pedagogic

framework. This project is building on the success of our IMPALA1 work with medical students to

explore uses of this web 2.0 technology with other cohorts of students and to introduce video

podcasting as an alternative to conventional seminar presentations.

Gondar Project

Project Leaders: Ms Liz Grant, Dr Jon Scott & Dr Mark Goodwin

The University of Leicester has an on-going wide-ranging programme collaborating with the

University of Gondar, Ethiopia. This particular project focuses on the biosciences.


29

Pedagogical Research on Taught Postgraduate Programme

Project Leaders: Dr Chris Cane & Dr Nick Tate (SPLINT CETL)

The one-year taught masters programmes pose special problems due to their tight timescale and

diversity of students. In particular programmes with high proportions of overseas students with

relatively diverse backgrounds can present challenges for teachers. This project involves an

investigation of the impact of some of these issues on the student experience

Bioethics Bytes

Project Leader: Dr Chris Willmott

Bioethics is an important topic but teaching it is often difficult for the non-specialist. Access to good

teaching resources is often the key to successful classes. Bioethics Bytes is a ‘blog’ type web

resource which highlights current issues in bioethics in the media both in short review type articles

and also listings of resources in the press, on the web, and on TV.

Reward and Recognition for Teaching and Learning in the HE Sector

Project Leaders: Dr Annette Cashmore and Dr Jon Scott

This project involves a survey of the policies for promotion on the basis of teaching and learning

activities. Ways in which policies are being implementation and a survey of the perceptions of

academic staff to reward and recognition in the HE sector are important aspects of this work. A

collaboration with Prof Lee Harvey from the HEAcademy.

Communicating the Nature of Science in the Classroom (In collaboration with Newman College

of Higher Education, Birmingham.)

Project Leader: Dr Annette Cashmore

This project involves looking at science provision from primary to secondary and the ways in which

concepts are portrayed.

Developing Global Approaches in Practice in Teaching and Learning

Project Leader: Ms Liz Grant & Dr Annette Cashmore

With the growing diversity of the students within Higher Education, taking a global approach to the

student experience is paramount in all areas. This project is aimed at developing an approach to

globalisation to practice in teaching and learning that can be introduced as an accredited part of

staff development.

Development of Question Banks for Online Formative Assessment in Molecular Biology

Project Leader: Dr Tim Harrison

Formative assessment is a valuable tool both for the student and the teacher. However it is often

not used due to the time required to devise suitable questions. This project is establishing a bank

of questions for first years for use on a variety of molecular biology modules to allow on-line self-

assessment by students and to provide feedback to staff to identify areas of difficulty which may

require more coverage.


30

Appendix 2- Student Involvement

Undergraduate and postgraduate students from Biological Sciences and the Medical School have established a GENIE student network in order to become more involved in activities, to contribute to strategic planning through membership of the management group and to promote collaborations with staff. Current and planned activities are listed

• Student network working group set up

• GENIE up date included on Staff/Student committees

• Attendance and presentation at CETL student network meeting

• Designing outreach activities

• Demonstrating on outreach activity days

• Genetics postgraduate forum set up

• Collaborating on project ‘Efficacy of Feedback in the First Year Programme’

• Collaborating on the project ‘Moving beyond Plagarism Detection toward a Culture

of Academic Integrity’

• Student membership of module development team for third year module


31

Appendix 3 Publications, Presentations and Workshop Contributions

Publications

2005

Badge, J., Cann, A.J. & Scott, J.J.A. (2005). e-Learning versus e-Teaching: Seeing the

Pedagogic Wood for the Technological Trees. BEE-j 5-6 11pp.

Badge, J.L., Cann, A.J. and Scott, J.J.A. (2005). Training the teachers: virtual learning – real

benefits? P. Goodhew, M. Murphy, S. Doyle, T. Walker, S. Maw, J. Wilson, K. Clark, P. Chin and

T. Overton, eds. Proceedings of the Science Learning & Teaching Conference (2005), pp 179-

182, ISBN 1-903815-15-0

Scott, J.J.A. (2005). The locust jump: an integrated class practical. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 29, 21-26

Scott, J.J.A. (2005). Students’ Perceptions of Skills Acquisition in the Undergraduate Bioscience

Curriculum. BEE-j 6-1 14pp

Willmott, C. (2005). What makes the best learning experience? Bioscience Education E-journal

5-C1

2006

Badge, J., Cann, A., Scott, J.J.A. & Dawson, E. (2006). Multimedia tools and their accessibility

http://www.techdis.ac.uk/index.php?p=3_7_26_2

Lister, S.J., Jones, N.B., Spurgeon, S.K. & Scott, J.J.A. (2006). Simulation of human gait and

associated muscle activation strategies using sliding-mode control techniques. SIMPRA 14, 586-

596

Scott, J.J.A. (2006). Why am I here? Student choice in the Biosciences. BEE-j 6-1 14pp

Scott, J. and Graal, M. (2006) Why Are Students Failing? An interview based investigation of

factors underlying academic failure in the first year. In: Student Transition and Retention. Eds

Cook, A., Rushton, B.S. and Macintosh, K.A.. University of Ulster Press, Coleraine.

Willmott, C. (2006). Never again shout “That WOULD have been useful for my teaching” at the

TV. Bioscience Education E-journal 7-C1

2007

Badge, J. Cann, A. and Scott, J. (2007). ACCESS (Audio Content Creation for Educational

SuccesS). Eds Chin, P. et al. Proceedings of the Science Learning & Teaching Conference

(2007), pp 169-174. ISBN: 978-1-905788-39-2.

Badge, J., Cann, A. and Scott, J. (2007). Multimedia tools and their accessibility. Eds Chin, P. et

al. Proceedings of the Science Learning & Teaching Conference (2007), pp 217-218. ISBN: 978-

1-905788-39-2.


32

Badge, J.L., Dawson, E., Cann, A. J. & Scott, J.J.A. (2007). Multimedia Tools And Accessibility:

Benefitting The Disabled Learner? British Journal of Educational Technology. Submitted.

Badge, J. & Scott, J.J.A. (2007). To Cheat of Not to Cheat? A trail of the JISC plagiarism

detection service with biological sciences students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

32(4) 433-439.

Cashmore, A. Hawkridge, D., Kramer, C., and Suter-Giorgini, N. Student-centred problem-

based group exercises in molecular biology. Proceedings of the Science Learning and Teaching

Conference (2007), pp. 227-228. ISBN: 978-1-905788-39-2.

Kramer, C., Barber, R., Cashmore, A., Dalgliesh, R., Suter-Giogini, N., and Willmott, C. (2007)

Linking DNA structure and sequencing using model based learning. Proceedings of the Science

Learning and Teaching Conference (2007), pp. 107-109. ISBN: 978-1-905788-39-2.

Willmott, C. (2007). ‘You have 45 minutes, starting from now’: helping students develop their

exam essay skills. Bioscience Education E-journal 9-C2

Presentations

2005

Badge, J., Cann, A.J., & Scott, J.J.A., Training with teachers: virtual learning – real benefits?

HEA Science Learning & Teaching conference; University of Warwick, 2005.

Scott, J.J.A., Why are students failing? 18th International Conference on the First Year

Experience; University of Southampton, 2005.

Scott, J.J.A., Students’ perceptions of key skills. HEA Bioscience Meeting; University of Leeds,

2005.

2006

Badge,J., Cann, A. and Scott, J. Doing two things at once- the cheat’s guide to Blackboard

uptake with teaching staff. The Seventh Annual Durham Blackboard Users’ Conference;

University of Durham, 2006

Badge, J., Cann, A. and Scott, J. Roll-out of the JISC Plagiarism Detection Service with

Biological Sciences Students. 2nd International Conference on Plagiarism; University of

Newcastle, 2006. http://www.jiscpas.ac.uk/2006papers.php?s=8

Cashmore A.M. Virtual Genetics Education Centre: Challenges and Opportunities, Beyond

Distance International Conference - Pushing the Boundaries: Setting the E-learning Research

Agenda, Leicester, 2006.


33

Willmott, C., Website production as a means to teching ethics: an example from the biosciences

Pushing the boundaries – setting the e-learning research agenda; Leicester, January 2006.

Willmott, C., Putting bioscience into context: excercises to enhance engagement Society for

Experimental Biology annual meeting; Canterbury, April 2006.

Willmott, C., Problem-based learning in science Society for Experimental Biology annual

meeting; Canterbury, April 2006

Willmott, C., Tackling bioethics in the classroom – some practical ideas ASE West of England

Conference; Bristol, June 2006

2007

Badge, J., Cann, A. and Scott, J. ACCESS (Audio Content Creation for Educational SuccesS).

Science Learning & Teaching Conference; Keele University, 2007.

Badge, J., Cann, A. and Scott, J. Multimedia tool and their accessibility. Science Learning &

Teaching Conference, Keele University, 2007.

Bevan, R., Scott, J., Cann, A., Willmott C. & Badge, J. Putting focus into student feedback.

HEA Bioscience Meeting; Oxford Brookes University, 2007.

Cashmore A.M. The Leicester GENIE CETL experience. Beyond Distance International

Conference – Learning Futures, Leicester 2007.

Cashmore A.M., Tate, N. & Raine, D. The Leicester CETLs: Sharing experience. Beyond

Distance International Conference – Learning Futures, Leicester January, 2007.

Cashmore, A. Hawkridge, D., Kramer, C., and Suter-Giorgini, N. Student-centred problem-

based group exercises in molecular biology. Science Learning and Teaching Conference, Keele,

June 2007.

Kramer, C., Barber, R., Cashmore, A., Dalgliesh, R., Suter-Giogini, N., and Willmott, C. (2007)

Linking DNA structure and sequencing using model based learning. Science Learning and

Teaching Conference Keele, June 2007..

Willmott, C., You don’t want to do it like this, you want to do it like that – seven lessons about

PedR methodology (that I learnt the hard way) ABC of Pedagogy, East Midlands CETL Network;

Leicester, January 2007.

Willmott, C., Tackling bioethics in the classroom – some practical ideas 5th Hatter Seminar,

Bioscience and Technology, World ORT; London, January 2007.

Willmott, C., Getting published – writing papers for pedagogic research journals Getting started

in educational research in the science; Oxford, May 2007.


34

National Workshops for Discussion of Approaches or Strategies of Teaching and Learning

2005

National Workshop to Develop Stategies for Teaching Genetics to Medical Students and

Healthcare Professionals, NHS Genetics Education Centre, Birmingham. (Annette Cashmore)

2006

No-Nonsense Approaches to Outreach and Teaching in the Sciences; University of Leicester,

May 2006 (Cas Kramer)



Outreach in Collaboration EM-CETLs workshop; CELS, October 2006 (Cas Kramer)

Raising Pedagogic Research Capacity HEA Workshop; London, December 2006 (Jon Scott)

2007

Launch of Netherlands house for Education and Research (NethER); Brussels, February 2007

(Cas Kramer)

Annual HE/Schools Conference, SSAT Conference; Birmingham, March 2007 (Chris Willmott)



Higher Education Academy Biosciences Subject Getting Started in Educational Research in

Science, Oxford Brookes, May 2007 (Annette Cashmore, Jon Scott, Chris Cane, Jo Badge, Ruth

Bevan, Chris Willmott)

Higher Education Academy Biosciences Subject Centre Differentiated Learning Forum –

Strething Able Students, Leeds, June 2007 (Chris Cane)

Higher Education Academy Subscribers’ Meeting, London, July 2007 (Annette Cashmore)


35

Appendix 4 Workshops Organised by GENIE

National Network of Stake Holders in Genetics:

Virtual Genetics Education Centre University of Leicester, April 2005

Genetics Science and Society – a Multifaith Approach

Launde Abbey, East Norton Leicestershire, October 2006 A two day conference for academics, students and the public

Planned Programme (GENIE, University of Leicester)

Launch of the Virtual Genetics Education Centre October 2007

Reward and Recognition for Teaching and Learning in HE

March 2008 Practical Teaching in Molecular Biology

September 2008

Genetics, Science and Society- An Evolutionary Approach March 2009 (Planned for two days at Launde Abbey)

East Midlands CETLs Network Workshops: ABC of Pedagogy,

University of Leicester, January 2007

Reward and Recognition, University of Leicester, May 2007

Other Organised Workshops:

Imagining Higher Education – the Taught Postgraduate Experience

A series of workshops iin collaboration with SPLINT (CETL in Geography), Staff

Development and the Teaching Enhancement Forum.

May 2007 Considerations and Complexities for Teaching and Learning Practices

Nov 2007 The Leicester Student Experience

Dec 2007 Employability

Jan 2008 Curriculum Design


36

Appendix 5 GENIE Outreach Activities

• April 2005:

o Department of Genetics Open Day 20th Anniversary of DNA Fingerprinting / 40th

Anniversary of Department

• March 2006:

o Bioscience event (Nottingham) for National Science week

o Womens’ Institute event in collaboration with the British Association for the

Advancement of Science. What’s in our Genes?

• June 2006:

o Festival of Science event (Bretby nr Burton on Trent)

o Festival of Science event (Derby)

• September 2006:

o Dynamic DNA (2 days for year 9 pupils)

• November 2006:

o Genetics Taster Session, University of the 3rd Age

o Derbyshire Skills Festival (In collaboration with theLearning & Skills Council,

Derby)

• December 2006:

o Taster day for 6th formers from Leicestershire school

• February 2007:

o Taster Day for yr9 pupils from Warwickshire Aimhigher

o Genetics Evening for Muslim/Christian Womens’ Group

• March 2007:

o University Experience Day for year 9 pupils from a Leicestershire School.

o Science Circus for National Science Week , Nottingham

o DNA taster session for 6th form students at a Leicester School

o Science Fair at Ibstock Community College for National Science Week

o Science event at John Cleveland College, Hinckley for National Science week

o Weekend public event jointly organised with Department ofChemistry and

piCETL

• April 2007:

o Dynamic DNA II (2 days for year 8/9 pupils)

• May 2007:

o Bioscience day (at Nottingham) for yr7/8 jointly organised with CELS (Centre,

for Effective Learning in Science)

o Genetics Evening for Rotary Club

o Genetics in the Community (2 events) Leicester

• June 2007:

o Genetics session in University Experience Day for a Northamptonshire school

o CULN University Experience Day for AS students from 3 Leicester Sixth Form

Colleges

o Focus on Medicine – Open Day

o Genetics Taster Session in Homecoming Visit for Alumni


37

• July 2007:

o GENIE Summer School for year 11

o DNA taster day for year 12 students from a Nottinghamshire School

o GENIE Summer School for year 10 pupils from South Yorkshire Schools

• August 2007:

o Genetics in the Community event for Black Minority Ethnic Carers’ Network

Planned activities

• Autumn 2007:

o Genetics Taster Session for Inner City Practices (GPs, Nurses & Practice

Managers)

o Genetics Taster Evening for St Philips Centre, Leicester

• 2008:

o Science event jointly with Chemistry Dept – a Royal Society of Chemistry

Initiative

o Bioscience day (at Leicester) for yr7/8 jointly organised with CELS

o Genetics follow up for Inner City Practices

o Student Science Helps Health for year 10 boys organised with AimHigher East

Midlands

o Dynamic DNA for year 9 puplis.


38

Appendix 6 GENIE Participants

Core GENIE Team

Dr. Annette Cashmore Director

Ms. Ila Patel Services Manager

Mr. Alex Chaix Administrator

Vacancy Clerical Assistant

Dr. Mark Goodwin CETL Teaching Fellow

Dr. Cas Kramer CETL Teaching Fellow

Dr. Nicola Suter-Giorgini CETL Teaching Fellow

Dr. Jo Badge Web Resources Development Officer

Dr. Ruth Bevan Research Associate

Ms. Heena Patel Research Associate

Ms. Nadya Yakovchuk Research Associate (Starting 1 October 2007)

Ms. Bonnie Green Research Assistant

Mr. David Willis Research Assistant

Dr. John Scott Director of Studies, Biological Sciences

Dr. Chris Talbot Senior Lecturer in Genetics

Dr. Chris Willmott Senior Lecturer in Biochemistry

GENIE Affiliated Staff

Dr. Ruth Barber Research Fellow, Dept of Genetics

Dr. Chris Cane MSc Programme Coordinator

Dr Alan Cann Senior Lecturer in Biological Sciences

Dr. Raymond Dalgliesh Senior Lecturer in Genetics

Dr. Fred Tata Lecturer in Genetics

Other Staff involved in Teaching Genetics or GENIE project work

Prof. Rhona Borts Professor in Genetics

Prof. Tony Brooks Professor in Genetics

Prof. Yuri Dubrova Professor in Genetics

Ms. Liz Grant Educational Developer, Staff Development

Dr. Flav Giorgini Lecturer in Genetics

Dr. Tim Harrison Head of Biochemistry

Dr Colin Hewitt Lecturer in Genetics

Mr Paul Jackson Head of Student Support and Development Services

Prof. Sir Alec Jeffreys Professor in Genetics

Prof. Mark Jobling Professor in Genetics

Prof. Julian Ketley Professor in Bacterial Genetics

Prof. Bambos Kyriacou Professor in Genetics

Dr. Juie Morrissey Lecturer in Genetics

Dr. Ezio Rosato Reader in Genetics

Dr. Nicola Royle Senior Lecturer in Genetics

Dr. Eran Tauber Lecturer in Genetics

Dr. Christine Wells Teaching Fellow in Biochemistry

Prof. Peter Williams Head of Dept. of Genetics


39

Appendix 7: Summary of Projected Two and Five Year Outcomes Outlined in the Original Bid

Two Year Outcomes

Goal Desirable Outcome Setup of CETL structure, appoint strategic and management committees Engagement with the Biosciences Subject Centre to appoint steering and management committees, advertising the work of the CETL internally and nationally Establishment of CETL Offices Workshop and seminar programme launched and established Initial projects trialled and evaluated on existing Genetics Courses Rolling programme of project development established Dissemination networking Virtual Genetics Education Centre Evaluation Refurbishment of teaching laboratory and computing facility

Effective strategic and centre management committees. All staff appointments completed To raise awareness of the work of the CETL through a standing feature in the University Bulletin and news reports and sessions of the University Teaching and Assessment Network. To have raised awareness and understanding by the target group by collaboration with the HE Academy Office established in refurbished accommodation Workshops and seminars to be held twice a year. Initially at Leicester and then regionally funded by the CETL but hosted by one of the target group. Projects 1,2 and 3 as summarised in the original bid, are to be developed, resources produced and used in undergraduate and/ or postgraduate programmes and feedback obtained from both staff and students To have a rolling programme of project development with key Genetics staff and staff from other disciplines carrying out development under the auspices of the CETL. Staff from Leicester and other members of the network to be involved. Initial restricted regional network established and functioning well. Plans in place to extend network nationally and internationally. Launch of web-based version of resources and Genetics information Effective evaluation strategy in place and initial activities evaluated. Results analysed and utilised to inform future planning. Teaching facilities ready for use for 2007/2008 academic year .


40

Appendix 7: Continued

Five Year Outcomes

Goal Desirable Outcome To have established a system of reward related to the work of the CETL To have network of target group operating to promote efficient sharing and uptake of best practice and resources. To increase impact on student numbers at Leicester To evaluate the awareness and understanding of the work of the CETL Evaluate the impact on Leicester programmes Evaluate the impact nationally Publish outcomes

To have work of at least 20% of key staff recognised by reward and to have at least 6 short term secondments from across the University. To have at least 50% of the target group actively participating in workshops and seminars Number of students where learning experience includes work of the CETL to have doubled Completion of survey and subsequent analysis through the University TAN completed. Survey of participants in workshops completed and outcomes analysed To have obtained feedback for at least 75% of the projects that have been implemented through new modules. To have several examples of use of the generic components of the project work in other Faculties To have surveyed target group to ascertain level of contribution to the VGEC and of the use of the CETL resources and approaches themselves. Extensive development of the VGEC and publication of evaluation results.


41

Appendix 8: Dissemination, Locally, Regionally and Nationally

Within the University

• Articles on University website and printed newsletters

• Open Days

o 20th / 40th Anniversary (April 2005),

o University Homecoming (Alumni weekend June 2007),

o Focus on Medicine Medical School Open Day (June 2007)

• Featured in Degree Congregation booklets (2005, 2006, and 2007)

• Presentation ‘What can GENIE do for you?’ Dr Annette Cashmore, January 2006

• Teaching Enhancement Forum (September 2006 - Members of GENIE gave talks and

facilitated at workshop sessions)

• Opening of GENIE Labs (September 2005)

• GENIE Launch Event (December 2006)

• GENIE Website

Regionally and Nationally

• GENIE Website

• Local Press Articles (covering award of CETL funding, capital refurbishment and

outreach events)

• Work with HOPE Foundation (local cancer research charity – talks to local groups)

• East Midlands CETLs Network (launch June 2006, booklet (see CD ROM), website)

• Advertorial articles (see CD ROM, featured in The House and Regional Monitor

magazines for National and Local Government)

• HEA Biosciences Subject Centre

o Meetings & Workshops (Getting Started in Educational Research in the Sciences

– Oxford Brookes May 2007 – 2 presentations, Science Learning & Teaching

Conference – Keele June 2007 - 6 papers presented, Pedagogy, Differentiated

Learning Forum – Leeds June 2007)

o Publications

o Represented on GENIE Management Committee

• SciTec iFestival (regional innovations festival – June 2006

http://www.innovationem.org.uk/)

• Publicity from and for Outreach for Schools and Colleges

• Events for regional groups eg. Chambers of Commerce, Rotary Clubs, Womens’

Institute, Muslim-Christian Womens’ Group

• Visitors to University visiting CETLs eg. MEPs, Higher Education Minister, etc

• Peer reviewed publications and presentations (see Appendix 3)

• Work with outside organisations eg. NHS Centre for Genetics Education,


42

Appendix 9 Sources of Data The nature of the data used in this report is varied depending on the project or activity to which it

relates. Most examples of data cited in this report can be found in the appendices, on the

accompanying CD-ROM and/or on the GENIE website (www.le.ac.uk/genetics/genie). This list

indicates the nature and sources of data.

• Evidence for engagement in pedagogic research and its dissemination can be found in

Appendix 3 to this report.

• Appendices 1,2,4 and 5 provide information about our activities, projects,student

activities,workshops and seminars and outreach activities.

• Example outreach questionnaire data from students and staff is available on the CD-ROM

and there will be analyses of data obtained for a range of activities available on the GENIE

website.

• Some of the evidence of dissemination activities are on the CD-ROM and the types of

activity in this area can be seen in Appendix 8.

• Some of the University strategies will be available on the GENIE website, others can be

found on the University website (http://www.le.ac.uk)

• Evaluation data for project work can be found on the GENIE website for projects that have

reached the stage of analysis and reporting. As examples,the evaluation process and data

for the meiosis and DNA sequencing and structure tutorials are on the CD-ROM.

• As evidence of awareness of GENIE activity, aims and impact on practice and University

strategy and policy, examples of transcripts and recordings of interviews with senior

management and other staff and students are on the CD-ROM.

• As informal evidence, slideshows and videos illustrating GENIE events are on the CD-ROM

• Examples of educational videos being produced as part of one of the GENIE projects are on

the CD-ROM

• Examples of the use of technologies such as teacher made videos and student podcast

recordings are available on the CD-ROM


43

CD-ROM

How to use the disk: The CD-ROM has been tested with recent versions of Internet Explorer (PC), Safari (Mac & PC) and Firefox (Mac & PC). Most of the media files require Flash Player (available free at adobe.com) – if you do not have this installed you will be prompted to install it. Windows – depending on the setup of the machine the disk may start automatically on inserting. If this does not happen double click on the CD drive icon in My Computer and the default web-browser will start and go to the table of contents of

the disk. If this does not open the contents page proceed as for Mac/Linux. NB. Recent versions of Internet Explorer may show a message regarding active content – please click the button in the pop-up window to allow this content to be displayed – content on this disk will not harm your computer Macintosh – start your web-browser and open the file ‘index.html’ on the disk.

The disk contains slideshows of the GENIE facilities, and activities, examples of the outcomes for

example tutorials and examples of evaluation data and its analysis, copies of printed documents, copies of news items and press releases, recordings or transcripts of interviews, examples of

videos, and student podcasts, and examples of recorded workshop material.

Additional instructions for use can be found on the contents page on the disk.

Contents of Disk:

• 20th / 40th Anniversary Open Day

• GENIE Launch

• GENIE Facilities

• Genetics Science & Society Workshop

• DNA Structure & Sequencing Tutorials

• Meiosis Tutorial

• East Midlands CETLs Network

• Dynamic DNA

• Outreach Activities

• Summer Schools

• Making Educational Videos

• Colleges-University of Leicester Network (CULN)

• Bioethics Drama

• Educational Videos

o Pipetting

o Gel Electrophoresis

• Documents and Other Material

o Interviews with senior management

o GENIE in the University News

o Examples of other GENIE-sponsored projects

o Interviews with other staff & students