# data[].attributes.body
Very interesting talk, and particularly relevant to me as I'm heavily involved in the C27 changes within my department. I found the least to most inclusive accounts thinking to be useful, and I'm currently trying to figure out what the different levels are for our programmes and my specific modules.

# data[].attributes.body
I found Paul's approach to curriculum very interesting, we do often focus on the teaching elements. The idea of transforming knowledge is key. It really made me reflect how on we approach curriculum in online courses.

We do not have lectures , so it is vital that the knowledge within the curriculum is transferred. How we scaffold the learning throughout and the talk really honed in on how we need to start with the curriculum and treat this as knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
I really enjoyed listening a Paul’s presentation. It really brought some very interesting areas for consideration. Being on a clinical programme and being part of the research team means I have little input into the actual curriculum. However this talk caused me to reflect on other ways that my influence could be translated into curriculum learning- particularly in my research area of neurodivergence. Enjoyed! Thank you for sharing.

# data[].attributes.body
Paul's talk made me think a bit more deeply about what we really mean by "curriculum". It’s easy to just think of it as a set of modules or a timetable of teaching, but what came through strongly in his talk is that, for students, it is something they live through. A lecture isn't necessarily meaningful just because it is well run; it matters because of how it fits into the bigger story of what students are being asked to understand, question and become. That idea of transformation, not just covering content, but changing how students think about their subject and themselves - feels like a useful way of re-framing what we are trying to do.

It also made me consider how much this depends on us working together. Curriculum can't really be built through lots of isolated decisions, even if each individual module looks good on paper. It needs shared thinking about what knowledge matters, how it is shaped for students, and what kind of graduates we are trying to produce. These days degrees seem to be talked about in transactional terms. If we design programmes with more attention to coherence, reflection and connection across modules, we give students a better chance of seeing university as more than a means to an end, and as something that genuinely changes how they see their subject.

# data[].attributes.body
I found Paul's approach to building a curriculum quite innovative. I realised the significant impact a curriculum can have on the entire learning experience as a pedagogical tool. When constructing a curriculum, it is important to bear in mind that the purpose of higher education is to influence three core areas of students' lives. First, it should help students to understand the body of knowledge we are trying to introduce them to and provide them with an overview. It should also affect how students perceive themselves (perhaps by realising that a specific area interests them) and their worldview. It is important to consider the students in front of us and what we are trying to achieve with them. This should take the entire programme behind the module into consideration. An important part of the curriculum is the form of assessment, as most students will adjust their learning accordingly, and consequently it can make or break their entire experience. It is also worth bearing in mind that there are many resources that can be used during teaching, so it is essential to use the ones that suit you.

# data[].attributes.body
Watching Paul Ashwin’s talk was enlightening, especially as it approached curriculum from a sociological perspective, which is relatively new to me. I found his methodology particularly useful, especially the ideas of the least inclusive account, watershed account, and most inclusive account. He used mathematics as one of his examples, which is directly relevant to the module I will be teaching. This made me reflect on the challenges faced by Year 1 students, many of whom are not aiming to become mathematicians but simply need to understand core ideas for their degrees and for everyday reasoning.

The watershed account recognises that students need guidance to engage with mathematical models through explanation, feedback, and gradual skill development. The most inclusive account goes further by connecting mathematics to students’ own purposes and to the wider world. Thinking about the relationship between self, world, and knowledge encourages me to design a curriculum that helps all students grasp essential concepts, build confidence, and see mathematics as meaningful, even if they do not intend to have a deep dive into mathematical research.

# data[].attributes.body
Very useful talk about the curriculum in higher education which I believed it was “out of my reach” after having attended a couple of meetings about the results of the actual curriculum review. I found very relevant how the development of the curriculum impacts the learning of the students about a specific subject but also what it can mean for the society they are going to go as qualified professionals. In addition, I understood better what is our role as teacher in developing the curriculum and how it might impact differently to different students. The part where Ashwin shows how students change their perception along the course is fascinating, I wonder what would my final students at Vet School think compared to their first year.

# data[].attributes.body
The talk was a very interesting bridge between the conceptual methods of learning that we have covered previously, and the actual practice of teaching that we do on a daily basis. It showed me that I should appreciate and engage with the curiculum for each and every course I am invovled with, and to ensure that my teaching is integrated with the wider context of the subject and programme as this is a critical part of building students understanding of their subject and its context in the world around them.

# data[].attributes.body
Paul's talk was very interesting and a lot of what he said regarding the purposes of a curriculum resonated with my own philosophies of learning, i.e. thinking about how the knowledge our teaching provides changes students' sense of who they are and the world around them. These questions, and in particular, the question of 'what do we want students to know and why?', are currently being discussed in my department as we prepare for the incoming curriculum changes at UoL. What does it mean to have a qualification in English Literature? What skills will the student have acquired? What texts will they engage with? What histories or contexts will they know about? And how does all of this acquired knowledge shape their engagement with the world as they leave university?

However, I think the difficulty lies in resolving these questions satisfactorily whilst also meeting institutional requirements. The knowledge we impart has to be structured through credit weightings, assessment parameters, contact hours, and university-level decisions about the meaning of curriculum (which many individuals in the department simply passively receive as dictates to act upon). Especially as a relatively junior member of academic staff, I personally am only involved in discussions about curriculum changes once plans have already progressed fairly far down the road.

# data[].attributes.body
It was interesting to hear an eloquent summary of some of the issues we ae facing now at the Department during the curriculum review. It would be ideal to apply his approach, however, there are many competing interests that makes the process less straightforward – for example, a particular professor that wants to push their study field and course eventough it does not fit within the vision of what type of student you want to produce.

To add to Ashwin’s reflections in his sociology study, most students are also developing as individuals, at the same time that they are in higher education – just a matter of age and maturity. I wonder how much of the change found in their study is due to education vs maturity and life experience. What is the direction of the effect? Education enhances student maturity or do students embrace education as they mature?

# data[].attributes.body
This was a very interesting talk - I had never considered what a 'curriculum' might mean past the accepted, local, institutional conventions. Listening to this talk also allowed me to reflect not only on how but why curricula are constructed, i.e. the student or learning outcome. It feels as though the 'knowledge as student understanding' has somewhat fallen by the wayside in the UK sector in recent years, particularly in considering how teaching methods and assessment are mapped against managerial-accepted curricula rather than against student-focused learning outcomes. I enjoyed discussion on collective bodies of knowledge and agree that the goal of an effective curriculum is (or at least, should be) not only about the student as learner, but about the student as researcher, as contributor, to knowledge but also to society. Relating the students' 'personal projects' is a term I found particularly useful and reflective, and underscores the importance of knowledge acquisition as also being a process of transformation of the sense of self (through engagement with disciplinary knowledge).

# data[].attributes.body
Ashwin raised several important points that have come up during the programme redesign meetings. During the initial discussions, particular emphasis was placed on the "why" and "what are we educating students for". This was important for clarifying the overall focus of the programme before designing the new curriculum. These conversations often centred on whether our focus should be on equipping students with the skills they need in order to get a job, or on prioritising what we believe is fundamentally important about the subject itself.

Ashwin also highlighted an an issue that has not been explicitly addressed in the meetings: how the degree is framed to the students. The importance of presenting the degree as an educational and transformative process, rather than a means of just obtaining a qualification has not been emphasised enough. This reframing also made me reflect on how it might help challenge the perception of students being consumers and the university as just a transactional step towards getting a degree.

# data[].attributes.body
I really enjoyed Paul's talk. As a newly appointed Programme Director for a programme that was rushed out quickly. I've just started to think deeply about what the curriculum should be. The programme is a mixture of maths, biology and computing modules - but I feel there is no cohesion between these modules, and as the students progress from one module to another, collecting credits, I ask the question now, is the programme allowing the students to reflect, is it transforming students' sense of self - what are the 'personal projects' of the students taking this module - why are they here? I need to ask these questions, as Paul indirectly did! The next thought I have is, how can I include reflection as an assessment for these students?

# data[].attributes.body
This was a very interesting talk, covering a lot of ground.

I'll draw out just two things that I found particularly useful. First, I liked his argument that different ways of delivering teaching - e.g. lectures, tutorials, seminars, self-directed study - should not be thought of in isolation, but only within the context of a whole curriculum. So, while a lecture might appear to some people as merely a way of passively recieving information, for others it could be a very active experience, if, for example, lectures were embedded alongside seminars in such a way that students brought developing questions and quantities to lectures. Related to this, he rightly noted that modes of delivery are experienced differently according to the modes of assessment that students know they will undergo.

Second, I liked the way in which he pushed back against purely vocational or narrowly skills based accounts of university learning. His empirical research showed how some students are able to conceive of their disciplinary knowledge and skills as something relatively fundamental to the ways in which they encounter the world and conceptualise their selves and environment. Of course, not every student will relate to disciplines in this way. But I think he did well at challenging the dichotomy between transactional and traditionally academic relationships to knowledge. Someone could be motivated primarily by professional ambitions, over the long term, but still be inspired to relate to their learning in a less transactional way in the short term. Indeed, this often happens.

# data[].attributes.body
Paul made lots of really valid points but also recognised the constraints some departments might be under regarding holistic design of entire programmes. Often as a lecturer on a module, you can focus on making your sessions good and anything beyond that is not your problem. Collective design initiatives could be initiated from the top/programme leads, with engagement from module leads and lecturers.

His thoughts on the pedagogic device and knowledge/curriculum being fluid and making transformations are interesting, but some might say it clashes with often rigid requirements of accreditation bodies.

His point on students needing to appreciate a university degree as an educational experience to undergo more of a personal transformation remind me of my own undergraduate experience. This coincided with the increase of tuition fees in 2013 and many of my friends felt it was mainly a transactional process needed to access career paths with higher salaries. It raises questions of whether this sentiment will increase with time, and whether universities can challenge it?

# data[].attributes.body
‘Collective focus’ and ‘shared design’ were the key ideas I took away from Ashwin’s talk. Collaborating with others and taking a holistic approach when considering how students engage throughout their degree was interesting. As part of the Technology Enhanced Learning Team, I often see how students navigate and interact with other areas of the course. When considering changes and improvements, understanding your own context, working as a team and reflecting with others will make the biggest impact, as it is not just down to the individual learning activities but the curriculum as a whole.

In the School of Medicine, we often work on defining and organising the numerous teaching sessions (CBLs, lectures, small group teaching, practicals etc) the students engage with and how they are labelled and presented. However, Ashwin’s suggestion that the meaning of a teaching session comes from how it is positioned in the curriculum was a useful reminder to consider the bigger picture.

Reminding yourself of what you are trying to do and ‘what kind of student you want to produce’ is helpful. My aim is to ensure our staff and students are digitally literate members of society that are able to apply their skills when working in the ever-changing digital healthcare environment to make a difference. Ensuring this ethos is embedded in the curriculum will help students to see the university as an educational experience thus changing their sense of self through their understanding of knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
This talk was really useful, particularly in helping me understand how to approach and view the curriculum. Previously, I did not have a clear idea of how to look at it, and the session highlighted that there are multiple ways to do so. Most importantly, it emphasised that the curriculum should support student engagement with the programme, challenge their intellectual thinking, help build relationships between people, highlight opportunities, and remain flexible and open to change.

# data[].attributes.body
The talk was an eye-opener on my part as it made me reconsider what a university curriculum should be about. Among them was the argument by Ashwin that curriculum is not only a list of content but an experience of transformation that influences the way that students perceive the world. I found it interesting that we are not trying to pass the information and instead provide students with an access to disciplinary knowledge power that allows them to think, act, and ask questions in a different way.

The other piece of advice which helped me was the fact that students approach curriculum in an extremely wide variety of ways and that well-designed curriculum provides organized means to have all learners contribute purposefully- not the one who already feels confident. I also agreed with what he said in terms of relating assessment to teaching and curriculum; it should not be placed in isolation but rather should support the main concepts that we want the students to learn.

In general, the discussion helped me realize the deliberateness with which we need to be, not only on the topics we cover but on the type of graduates our programs are intended to produce, and how our curriculum facilitates that process.