Learning and Teaching Committee

 

Subject:          Generic Skills Award

 

Origin:            PDQ Team

 

 

 

It has been brought to the attention of the PDQ Team that a number of other institutions offer ‘skills awards’ and it has been suggested that the introduction of a similar award at Loughborough would provide an opportunity to recognise and raise the profile of some of the work already being done to enable students to develop their employability skills. 

 

Information about generic skills programmes offered at some competitor institutions was presented at the last PDQ meeting and is attached for information.

 

PDQ has agreed to establish a working group to give further consideration to the options.  This will be chaired by the PVC(T) and include in its membership, subject to their willingness to serve, Jennifer Nutkins (Academic Registrar), Jenny Jones (Careers), Carol Newbold (Professional Development), Ruth Stubbings (Library) and Karen Roxborough (VP (Education and Welfare)-elect, LSU).

 

 

Exploring the Potential for Recognising

Students’ Skills

 

Paper prepared for PDQ Team May 2006

 

1  Context

Following the summary about skills acquisition circulated in an earlier PDQ meeting, this is a brief overview of implications and suggestions for a way forward for Loughborough University.

 

2  Summary of other University Awards

A number of universities already have reward systems in place or are thinking of developing them.  Most established would seem to be the York Award, Warwick Skills Certificate, University of Exeter’s Personal Development Award and Plymouth’s Learn Award.  Participant numbers typically number in the hundreds.  It is known that a record 250 applications have been received for the York Award this year (note: students apply in their final year although many more will have undertaken activities designed for the award).  Birmingham and Leicester universities have launched awards more recently.  Also some universities have modules integrated into the academic curriculum as contribution to the Progress File/personal development planning (PDP) agenda.  The basis of the various systems can be summarised as:

 

University accredited individual modules

Compulsory for all students

e.g. PDP module at Liverpool Hope

Optional

e.g. career planning and PDP modules at Nottingham Trent and Oxford Brookes

Accredited curriculum pathway

PDP ‘spine’ running through core modules at all undergraduate levels

e.g. Luton

Extra curricular non-credit bearing

External to degree programme

e.g. York

Extra-curricular credit bearing

Bolt-on approach; not part of degree programme

e.g. Warwick, Birmingham

Work-based (sandwich)

Diploma in Industry Studies

e.g. Ulster

Work-based ‘short-term’

Recognising work experience opportunities

e.g. summer skills certificate at Sheffield, team competitions at Aberdeen

 

3  Implications for Loughborough

  • Particular benefits for the two thirds of students who do not already benefit from work placement
  • Provides PDP opportunities (could be integrated into RAPID developments)
  • Recognises non-academic/extracurricular experiences
  • Could be perceived as a tangible benefit of the increase in tuition fees

 

The emerging assumption is that if the University wants to move down this path it should build on existing strengths and enhance the value of the Loughborough experience. i.e. a bespoke product designed to make what we do already even better.  The following activities are already in place:

  • Diploma in Industry Studies
  • Students’ Union training sessions
  • Library study skills/information training
  • Careers – Career management skills/Insight into Management/Top Graduate Skills
  • Counselling – skills in counselling, listening
  • Widening participation – skills training for student volunteers
  • Language centre
  • Business partnerships/entrepreneurship
  • Mathematics Learning Support Centre
  • Postgraduate research skills training
  • RAPID as a PDP tool (still in development and which would support the students’ self-assessment)

 

4  Four Possible Approaches

Approach

Advantages

Disadvantages

(1)  Do nothing

No cost involved

Lose out to competitor institutions;

Ignoring a potential demand from students

(2)  Re-package and ‘brand’ what is already available and market it to students

Minimal cost of identifying, co-ordinating and publicising positive features;

Focus is on existing strengths

Quick fix and not adding value

(3)  As (2) but in addition identify a few ‘pathways’ for students to undertake, e.g. personal development focus, work experience focus, community focus

Building on existing strengths and enthusiasm of support services;

Promoting more integrated and holistic working relationships between different sectors of the University;

More customised approach and could be the nearest fit between supply and demand

Co-ordinating a range of different activities;

Increased cost for providers;

Additional resource to facilitate co-ordination;

Lack of a motivating factor for students;

Evidence of demand unclear

(4)  Develop a new scheme from scratch, drawing on existing strengths and identifying new areas

Needs high level commitment;

If CATS-based could motivate students to take up opportunities;

Potential to include on academic transcript

Administrative cost;

Developing and getting approval for new courses;

Needs evidence /market research of significant take up

 

5  Recommendation

It is recommended that a working group is appointed by PDQ to give these options further consideration and to agree whether any should be taken forward.

 

Carol Newbold, May 2006