Consultation 98/40

Learning and teaching: strategy and funding proposals

Outcomes of consultation (April 1999)

Respond by 23 October 1998

Executive summary

Purpose

1. This document outlines proposals for our strategy to support learning and teaching in higher education. We invite comments on our strategic priorities and funding proposals to promote and enhance high quality learning and teaching.

Key points

2. We propose a learning and teaching strategy which aims to:

a. Encourage and reward high quality learning and teaching.

b. Ensure coherence in national support and funding programmes through increased co-ordination of effort and collaboration between agencies.

c. Disseminate and embed good practice and developments in learning and teaching.

d. Support research and innovation in learning and teaching.

e. Support institutions in building the capacity to enhance learning and teaching.

3. In order to achieve these aims we propose three main strands of activity:

a. The institutional strand - bidding for additional student numbers on the basis of achieved high quality.

b. The subject strand, to include:

• projects to improve and enhance the quality of provision
• the introduction of new broad-based subject centres to support learning and teaching
• innovation and development - to continue to support innovation in learning and teaching practice.

c. The individual strand - awards to support individual academics in enhancing learning and teaching, and to recognise individual excellence in learning and teaching.

4. These strands of activity would be underpinned by a Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund to which institutions could bid. We would like to spend up to £30 million on this fund from 1999-2000. However, final funding decisions will be made after this consultation and the Government's more detailed expenditure plans for 1999-2000 and beyond, to be announced in the autumn.

Action required

5. Please send any comments on these proposals to Richard Townend by Friday 23 October 1998.

Background

6. Since its establishment the HEFCE has sought to increase the profile of learning and teaching in higher education: their central importance is underlined by the fact that we allocate around three-quarters of our grant for these activities. Our funding of teaching aims to make the best use of public money to enhance the learning experience of students.

7. We have set up a standing committee to advise us on developing a learning and teaching strategy and the funding mechanisms to deliver it. This Learning and Teaching Committee is chaired by Professor Ron Cooke - Vice-Chancellor of the University of York. We now wish to consult on our proposals.

Strategic issues

8. We have identified six key issues to be addressed:

a. Raising the profile of learning and teaching in higher education. There is widespread recognition that the status and profile of learning and teaching need to be raised if higher education (HE) in England is to remain high quality.

b. Enhancing public confidence in the quality of learning and teaching in HE. As participation in HE increases and as higher education institutions (HEIs) respond to the lifelong learning agenda, the sector will have to convince a wider range of users of its high quality.

c. Enhancing the quality of learning and teaching. We need to focus support on the enhancement of learning and teaching practice, in order to ensure improvements in quality.

d. Responding to global competition. To ensure UK higher education remains internationally competitive we need to understand what others are doing, how international practice compares with the UK, and how HE in the UK could and should respond.

e. Promoting the efficient and effective use of resources. The large reductions in per capita funding over the past decade make it important to ensure more efficient and effective practice.

f. Encouraging research to support learning and teaching in HE. Developments in learning and teaching practice need to be underpinned by research. There is already a body of pedagogic research, and we need to ensure that further research is appropriately focused and that it informs the practice of individual teachers and institutions.

Strategic purposes and priorities

9. To address these issues we propose a learning and teaching strategy with five main purposes:

• encouragement and reward
• co-ordination and collaboration
• disseminating and embedding good practice
• research and innovation
• building capacity for change.

Encouragement and reward

10. We need to ensure that high quality teaching is given appropriate status - as is the case with excellent research. Excellence needs to be rewarded both to recognise the efforts made in achieving it, and to encourage further enhancement. We also need to provide funds to help HEIs that have not yet fulfilled their potential for excellent teaching to do so. Therefore, we wish to:

a. Increase the status of learning and teaching in higher education.

b. Reward achieved high quality in learning and teaching.

c. Help those with the potential to achieve high quality learning and teaching provision to do so.

d. Encourage the development of institutional learning and teaching strategies.

e. Encourage institutions to recognise the different needs of an increasingly diverse student population in their approaches to learning and teaching.

Co-ordination and collaboration

11. Many agencies, institutions, individuals, initiatives and programmes are concerned with improving the quality of learning and teaching. There is competition, duplication and lack of co-ordination and coherence between initiatives. Conversely, there is also considerable scope for collaboration, for example between national agencies, between institutions and within subjects. We could foster increased co-operation by collaborating with other agencies and ensuring our initiatives complement those of others; we could also encourage collaboration between institutions and subjects through funding initiatives. Therefore, we propose to:

a. Improve collaboration and co-ordination of strategy with key agencies, through cross-membership.

b. Develop nationally coherent and joint initiatives.

c. Support and collaborate with the proposed Institute for Learning and Teaching.

d. Rationalise our support for rewarding and enhancing quality in learning and teaching through a single coherent and integrated programme: the Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund.

e. Review and monitor existing and future funding programmes to evaluate their effectiveness and how they might develop.

Disseminating and embedding good practice

12. There is substantial potential for good practice and new ideas to be more widely broadcast, and for a much better understanding among professional teachers of developments in learning and teaching. For example, it is not yet clear that the outcomes of the Fund for the Development of Teaching and Learning (FDTL) and the UK-wide Teaching and Learning Technology Programme (TLTP) have been widely understood and adopted by those who might benefit from them. Therefore, we propose to:

a. Develop further subject networks to improve the dissemination and embedding of good practice, innovation, research and development. There is evidence that subject communities can be particularly effective in providing advice and support in learning and teaching.

b. Use existing resources more effectively by reducing bureaucracy and promoting collaboration.

c. Review the global competitive position of learning and teaching in UK higher education, and advise on appropriate responses.

d. Promote and encourage good practice in the development and implementation of institutions' learning and teaching strategies.

Research and innovation

13. There is a great deal of innovation in learning and teaching in UK higher education, much of which has been funded by the funding bodies. We need to identify those areas where further investment in research and development can best contribute to the learning experience of students. Furthermore, we need to continue to support the development of innovative learning and teaching methods to maintain a leading edge in higher education worldwide.

Building capacity for change

14. We need to ensure that the capacity for change underpins each element of our strategy - in terms of physical resources, appropriate teaching equipment, staff training and development.

15. The relationship between the purposes of our strategy, the issues to be addressed, and some of the proposed actions is outlined in Annex A.

16. We invite comment on the proposed strategic purposes for our learning and teaching strategy.

Funding

17. At the HEFCE Annual Conference in April 1998, we discussed initial proposals on how we could link funding to teaching excellence, to achieve our aim of increasing the status of learning and teaching in HE.

18. There was almost universal support for a funding mechanism which improved the status of learning and teaching in HE. However, strong concerns were expressed about our proposal to use the results of the Teaching Quality Assessment (TQA) process as a basis for a funding formula to reward excellence. Nevertheless, there was common agreement that some funding mechanism should be developed to both recognise high quality provision and encourage improvements.

19. In considering how to link funding to teaching quality, several key points emerged from the conference debate:

a. There were concerns about the discontinuity between the present and future quality assurance arrangements, if outcomes from these were to be used.

b. Other data - for example, institutions' learning and teaching strategies and the number of accredited teaching staff - could become available in the future, which could contribute to identifying high quality practice.

c. There was significant support for providing funding for excellence and enhancement through bidding schemes, rather than by formula.

20. In the light of this, and subsequent discussions, we have developed funding proposals based on bidding rather than through the mainstream funding method for teaching.

21. We invite comment on the proposal to base our approach to funding on a bidding mechanism, rather than the mainstream teaching funding method.

Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund

22. We propose to establish a single Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund. The aim would be to enhance learning and teaching practice, to reward high quality, and to encourage improvement through a number of separate funding strands. The fund would be targeted at three levels: the institution, the subject/discipline, and the individual academic.

The institutional strand

23. At present, we do not propose to direct any element of the Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund at institutional level. The primary reward for institutions would be the allocation of additional student numbers to those HEIs that demonstrate high quality provision. This would enable more students to enrol on high quality courses and provide additional resources to the successful institutions. It is a mechanism already in use - teaching quality was an important criterion for the allocation of additional student numbers for 1998-99, and could continue to be so.

24. We would expect the outcomes of the TQA process to be a significant part of institutions' evidence of high quality provision, but not necessarily the sole evidence. Institutions themselves would be able to determine what was significant and persuasive evidence of high quality.

25. The Government has announced funding for 35,000 additional students for 1999-2000, and we will soon be inviting bids for these to deliver the priorities of supporting high quality provision and widening participation in HE.

26. We propose to retain the separate panel already established to assess bids for additional student numbers, with guidance on quality criteria from the Learning and Teaching Committee.

27. We invite comments on the proposal to allocate additional student numbers on the basis of achieved high quality.

The subject/discipline strand

28. Our Fund for the Development of Teaching and Learning (FDTL) already supports the dissemination of best practice in teaching and learning at the subject level. The allocation of the funds is based on evidence (through the TQA process) of high quality in the subject. We propose to extend our support for this development activity at the subject level by:

a. Maintaining, through a single programme, the existing commitments to the projects within the FDTL and the Teaching and Learning Technology Programme (TLTP).

b. Extending this single programme to a further phase and inviting subject-based bids which demonstrate high quality from the 16 units of assessment covered by the TQA process between October 1996 and September 1998.

c. Providing additional funds to projects supported under the previous phases of FDTL and TLTP, and the future phase of development funding, which can demonstrate successful achievement, transference and embedding of their project outcomes. This would require robust criteria for determining and measuring such success. We recognise that applying this proposal retrospectively to past programmes may prove difficult.

Investing in quality improvement

29. Targeting additional student numbers and development funding at institutions and subjects which can demonstrate high quality will not necessarily enable improvement where high quality has not yet been achieved. The subject-based strand could therefore include development funds specifically aimed at quality improvement.

30. Funds could support partnerships and networks between 'best practice' subject providers and 'weaker' providers. The purpose would be to enable effective and targeted transference of best practice so that the 'weaker' providers could improve and develop their potential. The individual and subject overview reports from the current TQA process could help institutions identify areas for improvement. It is also possible that some institutions may seek to improve the quality among different providers within the institution. Thus institutional bids could be possible under this strand.

Subject centres

31. To complement the development of subject-based activity, existing experience and good practice need to be disseminated more effectively to ensure that they are more widely applied. It is apparent that dissemination between academics in different institutions can be achieved through networks of subject peers: the Computers in Teaching Initiative (CTI) demonstrates the success of this subject-based approach. The further development of subject centres could be an important way to facilitate improvement and change in learning and teaching practice.

32. A review of CTI and the TLTP's Teaching and Learning Technology Support Network (TLTSN) was published in August 1998 by the four higher education funding bodies. It recommends the establishment of a new broad-based programme of subject centres. These would be comprehensive one-stop shops and information gateways to support teaching and learning, including the integration of communications and information technology (C&IT).

33. The review report recommends that the subject centres should:

a. Act as knowledge brokers, promoting good and innovative practice.

b. Facilitate the sharing of practical experience in embedding good and innovative practice.

c. Manage a network of departmental users.

d. Review and promote new materials, including those using new technologies, in the subject context.

e. Disseminate the outcomes of other initiatives.

34. We propose to develop, jointly with the other funding bodies, a co-ordinated UK-wide network of new subject centres along these lines, some of which could be based on the existing CTI centres. We would wish such a programme to start from the summer of 1999, when the existing CTI centres could be replaced by the new subject centres. This would require detailed specifications for the purpose, role and nature of subject centres to be in place early in 1999, with a tendering exercise completed by spring 1999.

35. Comments are invited on the proposed subject strand of the Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund, particularly on:

a. The proposal to bring together the current programmes, and to commission a further phase of development projects.

b. The proposal to reward the successful completion of development projects, either existing TLTP and FDTL projects and future projects, or future projects only.

c. The proposal to invest in a programme aimed at provision that needs to improve.

d. The development of a UK-wide programme of new integrated subject centres to support learning and teaching.

The individual academic strand

36. Until now, most HEFCE bidding and project funding exercises have been at the institutional, functional and subject levels. However, there could be scope for providing funding to the individual academic in recognition of teaching excellence.

37. A programme which recognises and rewards individual academics (or small groups of academics) who have demonstrated excellence in learning and teaching would send a powerful message about the importance of these activities and would complement the efforts of institutions to reward teaching staff. As with grants for research, such awards could provide time for staff to pursue a range of activities: for example, to develop teaching materials, textbooks and C&IT applications; to improve delivery methods; and to develop innovations in curriculum and assessment practice. Such 'sabbaticals' could also be complemented by awards to recognise individuals with proven excellence in teaching and learning in particular subject areas, for example by conferring the title 'Professor/Fellow of Education: Chemistry'. If such awards and fellowships carried prestige, they would have the desired effect of raising the profile of teaching.

38. Such awards and fellowships would need to link closely with whatever arrangements are developed by the proposed Institute for Learning and Teaching.

39. Bids for this strand of funding could be made by institutions on behalf of their staff, so that there is an initial institution-based screening process. Bids would be assessed against clearly defined criteria and verifiable outcomes.

40. We invite views on the proposal to invite bids from institutions for awards to support individual academics in enhancing learning and teaching, and to recognise individual excellence in learning and teaching.

Innovation

41. We have supported innovation in learning and teaching in HE, primarily through the TLTP and FDTL programmes. Although our main emphasis in the future will be on disseminating and embedding innovative practice, we will continue to identify and invest in innovation in learning and teaching. A final dimension of the fund, which could transcend the institutional, subject and individual levels, would be further support of the development of innovative learning and teaching methods.

42. We invite views on the possible areas for innovation and development on which we should focus any future investment.

Benefits of the fund

43. A diverse fund of this nature would provide a coherent means to recognise both the different dimensions of high quality learning and teaching and the need to increase the opportunities for improvement. In particular, the fund would:

• offer flexibility
• provide a variety of opportunities to benefit from it
• recognise high quality
• build on established good practice
• take account of institutional feedback on previous proposals
• enable us to deliver our objective of rewarding high quality in learning and teaching.

44. The proposed fund is set out schematically overleaf.

Developing the Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund

45. The Learning and Teaching Committee will advise us on the development and detailed nature of the Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund, including any criteria for assessing bids under each strand. We would phase in the different strands of the fund depending on the money available, from 1999-2000 onwards. The initial key priorities could be:

a. The allocation of additional student numbers for 1999-2000 based on achieved high quality.

b. The development of subject centres, and their introduction from summer 1999.

c. The further development of FDTL, starting in 1999-2000 and phased in over two to three years.

46. The fund would be the principal means for us to reward high quality learning and teaching provision. Therefore, it would need to be of significant size to have the right impact and affect behaviour within institutions.

47. We would like to spend up to £30 million to support these proposals. The funds associated with student numbers would be in addition to the £30 million. The diagram at Annex B outlines the nature of the fund, taking into account the proposed strands and possible allocations to each over time.

48. The HEFCE Board will agree the final amount for the proposed fund in December, following this consultation and the Government's announcement of its detailed expenditure plans for HE in 1999-2000.

49. Comments are invited on the Council's funding proposals, and in particular the purpose and nature of the Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund.

Summary of responses sought

50. We invite comments on our strategic priorities and funding proposals to enhance learning and teaching in higher education. In particular, we would like comments on:

a. The proposed strategic purposes for our learning and teaching strategy.

b. The proposal to base our approach to funding on a bidding mechanism rather than the mainstream teaching funding method.

c. The proposal to allocate additional student numbers on the basis of achieved high quality.

d. The subject strand of the Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund, particularly on proposals to:

1. Bring together the current programmes, and to commission a further phase of development projects.
2. Reward the successful completion of development projects, either existing TLTP and FDTL projects and future projects, or future projects only.
3. Invest in a programme aimed at provision which needs to improve in quality.
4. Develop a UK-wide programme of new integrated subject centres to support learning and teaching.

e. The proposal to invite bids from institutions for awards to individual academics, to enhance learning and teaching and to recognise excellence in learning and teaching.

f. The possible areas for innovation and development on which we should focus any future investment.

g. Our funding proposals, and in particular the purpose and nature of the Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund.

Responses

51. Please send four copies of your responses to this consultation by 23 October 1998 to:

Richard Townend
Learning and Teaching Consultation
HEFCE
Northavon House
Coldharbour Lane
Bristol
BS16 1QD

ANNEX A

Strategic Priorities and Tactics