PROJECT CHARTER Welcome and Induction Phase 2 and 3 - INDUCTION OBJECTIVES DELIVERABLES/MILESTONES SCOPE Clearly define induction - timing and purpose/principles Develop and roll out a framework for Manchester Induction that sets outcomes to be achieved through induction activities, illustrated by examples of good practice Schools publish Welcome Timetable in advance of Welcome Week, online and with full details of venues Identify needs and develop supporting toolkit for use by Schools in considering and repurposing their Induction activities, including briefing/training activities. Ensure a sustainable approach to ongoing evaluation and adaptation Monitor the implementation of the Manchester Induction framework Evaluate its success (both staff and student perspective) in terms of a) consistency of implementation and b) effective delivery of purpose and principles Project Charter Agreed Project Plan Agreed Phase Two Engagement activities completed and framework published Arrangements for governance agreed and published Training/briefing sessions completed Schools publish Welcome Week timetable online, by mid August, coordinated with Manchester Welcome timetable Evidence of new approach to Manchester School Welcome for 2013, informed by timely publication of Manchester Welcome TT Phase Three Evidence of implementation of induction activities throughout the year Evaluation of framework completed (including recommendations for change) Transition to Business as Usual In scope Links with Manchester Welcome, including Residences (Pastoral) All students (n.b. inc non-resident) Unique needs of International students at School level Focus on first year experience, including progression Out of scope Content of and planning for Institutional Welcome – covered in Phase 1 DEPENDENCIES Buy in from Schools Timely publication of a timetable of events for Institutional Welcome Timely and effective communication with Schools of expectation that they will publish their Welcome Week timetable by X date, online, and what priorities are for Welcome Week versus rest of lifecycle Appropriate resource allocation SPONSOR STAKEHOLDERS Russell Ashworth, HoFA, Faculty of Humanities STEERING GROUP Active engagement with PSS Student Experience Leads; Key Induction Teams (Academic and PSS) in Schools/Discipline Areas; Teaching and Learning Management Group; Students and UMSU – including Peer Mentors and PASS leaders. Sign off/authority from SEMG Engaged Awareness TLG/MDC; School Leadership Teams; DSE Staff; Student Support Staff; Key Academic Staff General Awareness Academic Staff; PSS Staff in Faculties, Schools and Central Directorates SUCCESS CRITERIA Secretary: Kelly Rowe (Project Officer); Project Manager Jenny Wragge ; PGR Helen Baker; Liaison with WSoYG Paul Govey; PGT: Lisa McAleese; UMSU; Martin Laws and Tommy Fish ; Humanities: Sarah Featherstone ; EPS Karen Charters (tbc); MHS: Siobhan Cartwright; FLS: Carol Rowlinson; TLSO Marcia Ody; UoM Library Sarah Rayner 100% of Schools meet the updated expectation of School Welcome, as described in Phase 1 report Evaluation of Welcome Events shows that the have succeeded in their intended outcomes (specific measurables to be defined) Evaluation at the end of year 1 induction activities shows that they have succeeded in their intended outcomes (specific measurables to be defined) Ongoing evaluation and monitoring shows continued engagement and a continuous enhancement approach Student satisfaction with Induction, as measured by the appropriate survey tool (PRES, PTES, SB) grows/maintained >85% year on year. SB Nov 2011 – Satisfaction with Arrival : UG 93%, PGR 88%, PGT 87% PROJECT TEAM Jenny Wragge, Kelly Rowe, Adele Bartlett (Humanities); Mike Turner (EPS, tbc); Helen Franklin & Laura Jones (MHS); Joanne Jolley (FLS); Brendon Jones (Residences); tbc UoM Library; tbc TLSO; Sandra Davidson IT Services. PGR – one of the skills trainers or their team? BENEFITS Clarity of purpose about induction and distinction between Welcome and Induction Students increasing feel that, despite the size of the Institution, they are personally known and belong to a community Improvement in students’ understanding of academic expectations and standards – reduction in number of conduct and discipline cases involving academic malpractice; increase in student satisfaction with relevant elements of NSS/PTES/PRES/Barometer. Coordinated approach – efficiency and clarity; improved ability to help Integration and consistency of Experience across Schools. Ongoing and sustainable community of practice TIME FRAME Phase two – Induction January – September 2013 Phase three - Monitor and Evaluate - September 2013 - September 2014 RISKS RESOURCES Fail to achieve buy in from Schools Lack of engagement with students, especially Reps, undermines credibility Failure to publish Welcome TT in Feb will undermine efforts to get School TT published 0.3 FTE Project Manager + 1.0 FTE Project Officer + Project Team