1. COURSE DESIGN INTENSIVES (CDIs): DOING CURRICULUM DESIGN DIFFERENTLY

2. CDI aims curriculum design in extended, multi-professional teams design at programme level speed up development times cascade e-learning design expertise into academic departments

3. Timeline  2003-? e-Learning strategy development (Oxford Brookes University)  2005-9 National JISC Learner Experiences of e- Learning Synthesis and Support Project (http://mw.brookes.ac.uk/display/JISCle2/Home)http://mw.brookes.ac.uk/display/JISCle2/Home  2005-9 National HEA Pathfinder Course Design projects  2009-12 Successive Oxford Brookes curriculum development initiatives  2011-12 Coventry University curriculum redesign; Robert Gordon University, Oxford University  2012 -> Victoria University, Melbourne, Latrobe University, Melbourne

4. CDI Process

5. Sometimes bigger than Ben Hur … … other times not so much

6. Designing… … building in tandem

7. Designing in ‘public’

8. Peer review (critical friends) Promoting iterative design & development using peer and student feedback (Sharpe et al 2006) Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G. and Francis, R. (2006). "The undergraduate experience of blended e-learning: a review of UK literature and practice undertaken for the Higher Education Academy." [Online] Retrieved 3 October, from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/research/literature_reviews/blend ed_elearning_full_review.pdf http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/research/literature_reviews/blend ed_elearning_full_review.pdf

9. Benefits *  Tangible outputs  Collective ‘ownership’ of the course  More ‘coherent’ courses (arguably)  Building networks  Sharing good practice  Conceptual change “There’s been a kind of switch in the way that lecturers look at things” * (Dempster, Benfield & Francis 2012)