student feedback and leadership - Office for Learning and Teaching

Student Feedback & Leadership
iv)
The First Plenary
The first scheduled plenary was held on April 24th 2007. The aims of the
Plenary were:
––
to gather data and information as part of the research process;
––
to provide an opportunity to explore the key concepts of leadership
in the use of student feedback amongst the core project participants;
––
to discuss the progress of the projects and to consider issues arising
in order to facilitate future planning.
Invited to the Plenary were all members of ARTs, Project Team and the
Reference Group plus all PVCs (Academic), Heads of School and Program
Leaders. This was done to provide the opportunity to extend detailed
understanding of the project across key groups and to develop connections
that are often missing or difficult to achieve, in the normal practice of University
life. It was also hoped that 'traction' would be developed on the project.
Participants worked in small groups of Senior Leaders, Heads of Schools,
Program Leaders, Academic Staff, Support Staff, to consider three
key questions:
––
In reference to your position at the University, what do you think
are the responsibilities of your role in ensuring the effective use
of student feedback?
––
Identify key activities that you use to do this?
––
Identify any major obstacles in this process?
3.1.4 Observe
This first cycle began the process of interaction between formal and informal
leaders across the university with university strategy, plans and policies.
This was aimed at improving the student experience being implemented
by various levels of leadership.
At the formal level, the most obvious evidence of senior level support was
action by the DVC(A) in chairing the Plenary and the Reference Group and
becoming an active member of the Project Team.
At the informal level the action by the ARTs in identifying elements in student
feedback that required action was evidence of the active commitment
of academic teachers to accepting a leadership role in student feedback.
Each ART developed a process that engaged members in the identification
of common student concerns and then the planning of changes related
to these. While, on the one hand, the focus on analysing student feedback
Page 40