Annex B

The University's Self-Assessment

Curricular design

1.          Academic programme plans originate with teaching teams. Then they are:

2.         The University subscribes to the principle of peer reviewing to ensure both that quality is designed into courses and that they are conscientiously and effectively delivered. This peer review process operates at all stages of the development and monitoring of a course. Starting with the development of new programmes, courses of study in the University have all originated in departmental or cross-departmental teaching teams. Although course planning is done primarily at the "grassroots" level, there are a number of University guidelines which are to be adhered to in curricular planning. All undergraduate honours degree programmes are to contain certain elements common to every course, in particular:

• approximately 100 units credit (about 1500 contact hours) in a three-year period of study;
• an assessment scheme in which at least 50% weighting is to be assigned to the final year;
• about 20% of coursework in areas outside the major field of study, including units in computer literacy, English language, religion/philosophy, physical education, and elective subjects; and
• an independent honours project in the final year.

3.          As plans are developed, they are reviewed by relevant Faculty/School Boards for coherence with that particular unit's academic philosophy and consistency with the standards of their other courses. Once a course plan is endorsed by the Faculty/School Board, the planning group submits it to the ADC for examination of its adherence to University strategic plans, to the CARC to alert them to their intentions to have the course undergo full accreditation, to the Senior Executive Committee (SECO) to consider the financial implications of the course, and to an appropriately constituted external Peer Review Panel, which will then conduct a visit to the University.

4.          The Peer Review Panel is primarily comprised of academics, both from abroad and from local institutions, but with some professional representatives from the Hong Kong community and with one academic member on every Panel from the University. All of the Panel members are selected for their alignment with and expertise in the discipline(s) under review. The primary function of these panels is to provide expert advice to both the planning team and to the University, especially since the University's own staff with discipline-specific expertise for areas found in the course comprise the planning team. This neutral, detached, and expert advice gained from the Peer Review Panels is invaluable in the assurance of quality curricular design.

5.         After an on-site visit and the preparation of a critical report by the Peer Review Panel, the CARC takes up detailed review of the proposed course. The critical report serves as a prime guide for discussions with the planning team, but the criteria of course cohesiveness, progression, international standards of content, and the prospects for attaining excellence in the delivery of the course also serve to guide these discussions. In the event of disputes between the Peer Review Panel and the planning team, the CARC seeks to resolve them through examining the Panel's detailed report and discussing it with the planning team. Disputes between the CARC and the planning team are referred to the Senate for final resolution. The Senate takes up the discussion of every course on the basis of the issues identified by the various boards, committees, and panels, but also members are free to raise other issues as they may wish.

6.          Some form of coursework development for research postgraduate students is currently under review in the University. It is likely that these instructional elements will take somewhat different forms than those of undergraduate or taught postgraduate programmes.

Pedagogical Design

7.         Pedagogical methods, such as the planned inclusion of lectures, laboratories, studios, tutorials, seminars, practicums, workshops, fieldwork, and internships in courses, forms a part of the discussions with the planning team, especially by the Peer Review Panel and the CARC. Obviously, these pedagogical elements are matters of concern prior to these discussions within the planning team. These elements, along with teaching strategies in general, are to be included in syllabus designs for all courses and subjects (modules) when approval is sought for introduction by planning teams.

8.         There is no central policy on pedagogical methods, except in the broadest sense that the methods employed should be in harmony with the nature of the subject matter. In addition, tutorials are stressed when appropriate for first-year subjects. Most courses include some tutorial sessions in second- and third-year subjects as well, however the smaller enrolment in advanced coursework often eliminates the need for separate tutorial sessions. In the process of considering and approving the most appropriate pedagogy for the elements in a course, attention is given to both teaching and learning effectiveness which will likely result from the choices made.

9.         During recruitment interviews, candidates are invited to elaborate on their teaching areas and on their approaches to teaching and general academic time management. These lines of discussion serve two purposes: (i) to inform the panel of the individual's commitments and approaches to teaching and learning, and (ii) to inform the individual that the University considers teaching to be of utmost importance and that all who take up employment at Baptist should view teaching in the same way.

10.       Student feedback is obtained on pedagogy and academic content for all teachers at the end of every semester. This feedback is obtained by means of a teaching and learning questionnaire. Results of these exercises are available not only to teachers but to their department heads and deans, with statistical summaries of departments provided to the Academic and Professional Standards Committee (APSC), who are responsible for the monitoring of teaching and learning, and for reporting and making recommendations to the Senate on a regular basis.

Implementation Quality

11.        Given the nature of the University's commitment to Whole Person Education, there is a very broad concept of teaching and learning within the Institution. Un-timetabled and even informal teacher-student interactions are often valuable in the enhancement of these activities. Field trips, internships, and commercial attachments are features of many programmes. Perhaps the most influential of the non-classroom experiences between students and teachers is the honours project. Although it is a formal requirement, it is not timetabled, frequently occupying the greatest block of time in a student's final year of study. Working directly with a staff supervisor introduces students to a different aspect of learning than they readily experience in lecture/seminar/tutorial settings. Honours projects experiences also permit teachers to assess students' abilities to integrate and extend their factual knowledge into areas of less certainty.

12.         Teachers are encouraged to aspire to teaching excellence in a number of ways. Such aspirations are grounded in intrinsic motivation because the teaching profession is, to a considerable degree, self-selecting. People choose university teaching because they are attracted to the on-going intellectual challenge, the life-style, the excitement of discovery, and the pleasure of working with students. This self-selection/self-motivation is often the most influential force in conscientious and effective teaching. The University seeks to create an appropriate environment in which its teachers can attain excellence in teaching, and to provide direct and indirect motivations for this attainment. Some of these factors are:

13.          The relations between departmental and course management structures continue to pose problems to some extent in the University. Likewise, concerns exist amongst some staff regarding the role that good teaching plays in staff promotion/advancement processes.

Outcome Assessment

14.          Assessment guidelines have been adopted by the Senate for subject grading, project weightings, and honours classifications of graduates. The actual marks assigned to students' work are reviewed in departmental/course meetings (Boards of Examiners) and by external examiners, and the review process is monitored by the APSC.

15.          Information about students' satisfaction with their studies and their employment circumstances is obtained through regular administration of questionnaires to graduates. Employers' views on the effectiveness of the University's graduates and of its internship students in the workplace are also regularly, though not as widely, solicited.

16.          All staff obtaining teaching and learning development grants from University resources are required to submit reports at the conclusion of the funded activity. These activities vary from the conventional staff development grants in support of credentials acquisition, to special attachments for enrichment purposes at leading teaching and learning centres world-wide, to teaching development grants.

17.          Investigations are currently underway on two issues: (i) to improve the match between assessment methods employed in subjects (modules) and the content of their syllabuses and (ii) to obtain a better distribution of degree classifications in some courses across their full range.

Resource Provision

18.          In the sense that all academic staff in the University are employed to engage in teaching, academic staffing resources are heavily committed to the teaching and learning mission of the Institution. The most experienced and senior academics, those with the greatest commitments to research, also teach students at all levels. This gives indication of the seriousness with which teaching and learning commitments are taken in the University. As mentioned elsewhere, recruitment and promotion processes give attention to the teaching and learning quality agenda.

19.          The University's Centre for Educational Development provides both technology and training for the improvement of teaching. Significant staff development funds are committed to the improvement of teaching annually. Teaching development grants are employed to directly support teaching and learning enhancement, workshops, conferences, and seminars on these processes, and infrastructure support for them.

20.          The University is expanding its use of appropriate educational technologies to enhance the quality of teaching and learning. These developments need greater attention for both internal applications and those between the University and sister institutions.