Block from the Beginning: new perspectives from a new model

Slides from talk to School of Engineering & Sustainable Development, De Montfort University, 13 June 2024

1. Block from the Beginning:
new perspectives from a
new model
School of Engineering and Sustainable Development
De Montfort University, 13 June 2024
Professor Gary C Wood
Academic Director, New Model Institute for Technology & Engineering
[email protected] |@GC_Wood |www.garycwood.uk

2. Overview
•Introducing NMITE
•NMITE’s approach to learning and teaching
•Block delivery programme structure at NMITE
•What we’ve learnt and are learning:
•Positives
•Negatives
•Reflections and suggestions on implementation
•Q&A.

3. NMITE: a new approach
•New, small, HEI in Hereford –previously had no Higher
Education Institution
•Engineering andtechnology focus addresses UK shortage
of engineers –demand from industry for graduates with
more integrated engineering capabilities
•Intended to be a significant centre for innovative, mould-
breaking engineering education.
•First students started September 2021
•Achieved New Degree Awarding Powers commencing
1 September 2023.

4. Our innovations in L&T
•Unusual entry requirements
•Industry-linked, challenge-led learning experiences
•Learning 9-5 in a studio environment
•Block delivery model
•Substantial educator contact time
•Significant team-based learning and assessment
•Varied assessment strategy, related to professional
formats/outputs
•Graduates able to solve problems as they’re
encountered by professional engineers.

5. Curriculum Structure
•Each FHEQ level normally comprises 4 x 30-credit
modules
•Each 30-credit module takes place over 8 weeks:
•7 weeks of curriculum learning and assessment
•1 week consolidation and reflection.

6. Curriculum Structure –example (MEng
Integrated Engineering)
FHEQ 4 FHEQ 5 FHEQ 6 FHEQ 7
30
credits
The 21st-Century
Engineer
Creating Social
Value through
Engineering
People and
Projects in
Engineering
Research &
Modelling
30
credits
Thermodynamics
& Fluids
Energy
Engineering
Data-Driven
Engineering
Lifetime
Performance of
Engineering
Assets
30
credits
Statics and
Dynamics of
Simple
Mechanisms
Statics and
Dynamics of
Complex
Mechanisms
Manufacturing as
Integrated
Engineering
Master Project
30
credits
Fundamentals of
Analogue and
Digital Circuits
Control and
Instrumentation
Bachelor Project

7. Studio-based block delivery
•At NMITE all block delivery is in a studio environment
•Students “own” the studio for the duration of the
module, even when there are no staff present
•Students can stay in their learning and choose when
they break –so it’s an (even) more immersive learning
experience
•Bear this in mind for the rest of the presentation. For
NMITE, block delivery and studio are inseparable….

8. Industry challenges –examples
•Optimise pipe flow for a drinks manufacturer
•Produce and validate a design for a mobile climbing wall
•Design and build a moisture sensor for a timber-framed
building
•Develop a channel model to predict whether a satellite
communications link will work
•Respecify material for a torque arm.

9. Questions?

10. Some learning and reflections
•Structure & Course Design
•Assessment
•Outcomes
•Staff resourcing and workload management
•Student experience.

11. Structure & Course Design
•Design for block, rather than trying to retrofit –thinking about the
rhythm and energy of students through the programme
•Integrate skills: separate skills modules shift students’ focus and
affect motivation
•Think about different types of learning activities and what you want to
prioritise in contact hours
•Make connections between modules –students aren’t studying
multiple things at the same time, so have fewer opportunities to see
connections as readily themselves
•Think creatively about professional body requirements –talk to them!
•Make sure you have a good plan for modules before the start: you’ve
got less time to develop the module on the fly –although you can be
more flexible in delivery.

12. Assessment
•Opportunities for assessment for learning/authenticity
•Application of skills and agency in context of future
aspirations
•Beware of the ‘too much content’ argument: think about
balance between knowledge, skills and behaviours: it might
be about teaching differently
•Number of assessments: spread the loading for
students –it’s easier to manage with only one module
•Feedback and opportunities for formative assessment
and/or to correct course (Wood & Gibbs 2021).

13. Outcomes
•Management of assessment results and feedback
becomes more frequent, and this needs resourcing
•Students move from one module to the next before
they have formally passed
•Recovery of failure can be more challenging –longer
gaps between learning and assessment
•Grade profiles for modules may change –think about
how you manage and justify this effect.

14. Staff resourcing and workload
•Teaching needs to be an (almost) exclusive focus for
academics during modules –this needs careful
management (but also to manage over-teaching!)
•Unplanned absence is highly disruptive –need to plan
contingencies for this
•Consider and plan for demands on support services –
e.g. workshop spaces –block can concentrate demand
•Materials availability is critical –there’s less time for
students to wait so you need responsive ordering or
items to be in stock.

15. Student experience
•Students (and staff) have increased focus (Masterclass
2023; Buck & Tyrrell 2022; Ghapanchi2022) –but there’s a
fine line between immersive and intensive
•Block promotes active rather than passive learning (Morris 2022)
•‘Don’t have to spend too long on modules we don’t like!’ –
but they are sole focus without ‘relief’ of others
•Burden for workload management is shifted to staff
through greater awareness of availability of time
•Attendance issues are a challenge: a short time away has
bigger consequences on a block.

16. Student experience (2)
•Evens out stress and pressure for students
•But be aware that it requires them to be ‘always on’
•Student support activities can be more easily
timetabled –the students’ learning journey is clearer
•Sense of belonging to programme increases through
building greater cohort cohesion
•The studio space seems to be an important part of
immersion: how can you achieve this with block
outside the studio?

17. Moving to block
•We had the benefit of starting a whole new institution
•In an established context:
•Incremental change and retrofitting is very hard and leads to resistance
•Much easier as part of a programme refresh
•Start by agreeing a Programme Ethos with everyone involved:
•It empowers the design team to make decisions without wide consultation every
time
•It helps to navigate the push-back to changing technical content in the
curriculum
•Work from a blank canvas to design aligned with the ethos; bring back
content rather than discarding it
•Involve students as equal partners in the design process (see Wood &
Gibbs 2019; Gibbs & Wood 2021)
•Get your quality team involved early and take them on the
journey with you –this will help avoid missing practicalities.

18. A Programme Ethos
•A dynamic, outward-facing statement of the
programmes’ purpose and values and the learning
environment we aspire to. Should communicate in
clear language:
•the programme’s purpose(s)
•educational and discipline and professional values
•nature of the learning environment for students
•key approaches to teaching, learning and assessment
•Not easy to develop –but worth the initial investment
to save time (and arguments!) later
•See O’Neill (2015).

19. Conclusion
•Block teaching brings many benefits in terms of focus
for students and staff, and the outcomes it delivers
•Block allows a different approach to assessment and
the learning experience you provide –there’s space for
more authenticity, formative work, and AfL
•You can’t just teach a programme that wasn’t
designed to be block-taught in blocks: you need to
design for block teaching.
•It requires a different approach to resource
planning and management.

20. References
Buck, E & Tyrrell, K. (2022). Block and blend: a mixed method investigation into the impact of a pilot
block teaching and blended learning approach upon student outcomes and experience.
Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46(8): 107-1091.
Chau, H.W., Jamei, E. & Li, M. (2022). Block mode delivery for studio design teaching in higher
education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 60(3): 346–56.
Ghapanchi, A. (2022). Block mode of teaching in higher education: advantages and challenges.
Times Higher Education. Available at: www.timeshighereducation.com/campus/block-
mode-teachinghigher-education-advantages-and-challenges.
Gibbs, B. & Wood, G.C. (2021). ‘How Can Student Partnerships Stimulate Organisational Learning in
Higher Education Institutions?’ Teaching in Higher Education, 1–14.
Masterclass. (2023). What Is Cognitive Load Theory? Available at: www.masterclass.com/articles/
ways-to-avoid-cognitive-overload.
O’Neill, G. (2015). Curriculum Design in Higher Education: Theory to Practice. Dublin: UCD Teaching
& Learning, Available at: http://researchrepository.ucd.ie/handle/10197/7137.
Pyakurel, P. & Wood, G.C. (2024). ‘Studio-Based Block Delivery: A Case Study of New Model
Institute for Technology & Engineering’. Gateway Papers5(1).
Wood, G.C. & Gibbs, B. (2019). ‘Students as Partners in the Design and Practice of Engineering
Education: Understanding and Enabling Development of Intellectual Abilities’. In: Realising
Ambitions: Sixth Annual Symposium of the UK&I Engineering Education Research
Network. Edited by Malik, M., Andrews, J., Clark, R., & Broadbent, R., 231–45.
Portsmouth: University of Portsmouth.

21. Block from the Beginning:
new perspectives from a
new model
School of Engineering and Sustainable Development
De Montfort University, 13 June 2024
Professor Gary C Wood
Academic Director, New Model Institute for Technology & Engineering
[email protected] |@GC_Wood |www.garycwood.uk