 Good morning everyone, good morning esteemed panel members, good morning colleagues, my name is Lorraine Bourne, I am the Programme Chair of the Bachelor of Science in Psychology in DCU and it is my pleasure this morning to present on our staff identity and learning plan and I will present on behalf of our team with our colleague Dr. Marklin, Director of Teaching and Learning Enhancement at DCU. So what is D-STEP? Undergraduate Psychology Training, so pre-professional training, the four-year cycle degree in DCU began in 2010 and as part of our professional accreditation by the Psychological Society of Ireland, we have identified a core pillar within our training, research literacy, the capstone of our undergraduate training. So we are currently accredited by our Psychological Society of Ireland partners and in 2018 we will continue through the process of re-accreditation. So through our annual programmatic reviews and right now going through our actual, our first programmatic review, we have identified key areas for our staff, our psychology unit in identifying where we are positioned and our future, our sustainable learning goals. So the why, D-STEP, what is it about? So we have identified in order to address, based on evidence, enhancement, motivation, adaptive learning, we have identified serious gamified principles as core to curriculum redesign and assessment in our undergraduate program and we have identified as our staff unit key areas in terms of enhancing digital capacity and our ability to undergo curriculum redesign and assessment in a peer supported environment as key as core areas in our staff development, our learning plan. So who is our team? In terms of identifying our staff learning, we have looked at key pillars. So under curriculum redesign, myself and our chair of psychology, Professor Theresa Burke will be internal leads on the team. In terms of peer supported learning, so working very closely with our volunteer students and our psychology students within the unit, Dr. Sinead Smith, expert in behavior analysis will lead out in this. In terms of content, digital content development, so the evidence base of our staff learning and also the products of our learning activities, Mr. Project Boiland senior IT consultant, psychology discipline specific within our unit will lead out with our partners. And in terms of assessment, Dr. Kay Moncel, so senior lecturer in the Institute of Education, a center of excellence in research and teaching and education in DCU will lead out on that pillar, supported by our director of teaching and learning. So our core team is made up of internal leads in identifying our identity as psychology staff positioned uniquely in the School of Nursing and Human Sciences in the Faculty of Science and Health in DCU. So we have strong internal as well as external collaborative links. So we've identified a set of advisors to advise on our staff identification and learning plans. So at an international level, Arizona State University is our partner and director of teaching and learning enhancement will form part of the advisory group on assessment, curriculum redesign and digital content development. In terms of our UK collaborative partners in the University of Sussex again, director of teaching and learning, they will work closely with our leads in terms of staff development. And of course, our national partners in terms of advising on peer supported learning in GMIT and also in Menuth University. Our partners in Waterford Institute of Technology will advise on gamification. So our independent reviewers are separate at international level, Arizona State, so head of psychology unit there and national, our external examiner to the program will independently review the different phases of our staff development plan. So what is our plan? We will address this plan at two time points. I will address it and Mark will address it later when we look at how our project demonstrates impacts along the cycle. So we have broken down our plan, so a two-year plan, in four phases and that's based on the evidence-based reflective cycle under the CPD framework. So our first phase is conducting a learning needs analysis for our psychology unit. So within the School of Nursing and Human Sciences and also with our internal partners in the business school, the Institute of Education and Schools of Human Performance. So part of that is identifying our staff needs analysis, working through development of the learning plan, evidencing that learning plan, and then reflecting on our future learning goals or sustainability goals. So I will now hand over to Mark who will talk through this plan in more detail and how we meet the impact factors. Okay, unfortunately I don't have one for everyone in the audience, but we do have one for the panel to talk through the plan, but I will make a soft copy available if anybody is interested. So what we have to do, for criteria two, we were asked how we align with the framework, how we have clarity and coherence and indeed our student perspective and our institutional strategies. So that will cover the next set or the next section of the presentations. The aims of the frameworks, and I will just read these out, the aims of the framework to empower staff to create, discover and engage in meaningful professional development. Our plan does that. To encourage staff in pure dialogue, our plan does that. Our structure of our teaching groups, our self-reflections to allow them to assist and reflect and plan and contribute to their discipline. Our plan has factors for all of that. And of course, and probably most importantly, particularly from Cat's point of view, as you mentioned there, to contribute to the student learning experience. Our plan factors in that because it very much involves the students. Looking across the various different domains, and we'll break these down now in a second, the top three are catered for in the teaching groups that we'll establish. The staff portfolios also capture in one, two and indeed three, we're going to be doing some pure dialogue. Our professional skills come in for our international advisory panel, our national and international advisory panel, where we're bringing in both discipline experts and also teaching and learning experts to assist us, assist our own development. And of course, we're learning from one another as well. It is a two-way conversation. To show further alignment, what we decided to do was actually take, and this is just one example, and I do appreciate it, it's a bit small to see at the back, but this is the domain, the third domain, professional communication and dialogue. And we took each of the different major elements of our plan. So our teaching groups, our curriculum redesign, our assessment and feedback, and our peer-assisted learning staff portfolios, developing content, and indeed our dissemination and evaluation. And we mapped our touch points to the framework based on those activities. Now that's just one of them and I do appreciate that it's difficult to see, but we took each one of them, there was over 30 different elements as the people in the formal know, and we said, right, well, we have 10 direct touch points from our project evaluation, or 16 from our curriculum design, sort of stuff. So we are tightly linked to the framework. If we're looking at our strategic clarity and coherence, so looking at the plan itself, you will be able to see, and I addressed this to the panel, but you will be able to see that we have integrated evaluation throughout the project, and that's important. We didn't want to learn at the very end, it's a two-year project, we didn't want to learn at the very end, we wanted to learn as we were going along. And you will see that there's key touch points, and what we have down is impacts and deliverables. There's key touch points with students and with staff, so we're making sure that students are involved from the onset and staff are learning from one another as we go along. And the whole idea is that this project, the outputs from this, we're developing staff through this, that it goes beyond the lifetime of the project, that it makes it in a sustainable way. When we're training up with the help of Patrick and indeed other colleagues, training them up on how to create a staff content, online content, or flipping the classroom, that doesn't just limit itself to these modules and these core pillar modules that we're talking about, they take that knowledge and implement it in the rest of the programs. When they build relationships with Sussex and Arizona State University and Galway Mayo, that goes beyond the lifetime of this project. We used existing data, as Lorraine alluded to at the start, our programmatic reviews, also Izzy and our student survey of teaching to identify this as an area that we need to concentrate on. So we don't offer supply-led training from the Teaching Enhancement Unit, we offer demand-led training. And this was demanded based on the data that we have, building on the expertise that we have, the peer-assisted learning, the curriculum design, building on that, recognising our gaps and hopefully using the forum to facilitate our development as we go along. I'd like to spend a bit of time on student perspective, because the student voice is critical for us. Having the student's input into it is so important and that's why we started with our surveys of teaching. That's why we started with the Izzy's and so on, was to get them involved from the very start. And if I broke it down into before, during and after, well, very much the student voice is there from the onset, from these forums, from these feedback, from the review panels that we've created. Student participation, and I'll point directly to Sinead's contribution, which is in the peer-assisted learning. We are involving the students in their learning and research tells us involving the students in it, making a participatory, increases engagement, increases, in our case, what we hope is our attention and the success rates within our courses. So we involved them straight from the get-go and you will see in the plan that we have evaluations and test beds and pilots, even during the summer, will be piling it out to content with our students, just to test it out before we release it to the rest of the students. And by building in all of those touch points, by involving the students from the onset and training us, developing us on how to change our curriculum to do that, we will actually be building the graduate attributes, our software skills, the communication skills, the leadership skills. And this then will work as a template for us when we are developing other programs, training other staff. These will be the shining light of DCU, as far as I'm concerned, if we can get this project up and running. And overall, everything we do will be actually developing not just the digital capacity of the students, because when we implement gamification into it, when we implement a more blended learning into it, because of all the training the staff are going to undergo, the students are going to be engaged in improving digital literacy skills, but also sort of staff. And again, I go back to the point, they're going to bring this beyond the lifetime of this project. Very quickly, talking about the strategic alignment, well, about our university plan and our teaching and learning plan highlights five different elements, five different elements directly relevant to this project, professional development of our staff. It is something we have said in stone we are going to do. And this project lives up to that. Student-centred approaches, the same again. Innovation and teaching. Two minutes, great stuff. Innovation and teaching. STEM education. We pride ourselves in being leaders in STEM education and increasing the digital capacity of our staff and students. Our project meets all of that. In terms of impact, we originally looked at the Cool Bear framework, and this is what we submitted to go in there. But obviously, following the submission deadline, the forum shared what is the impact framework that they want to do. So we're not being fickle and swapping to it, but we think it's best to use what they form supply. And we supplied it in these four categories. So you will have noted from the onset in the very first slide, we have a website domain bot, and we have the Twitter handle already boxed off if we are successful in getting it. But we also have internal avenues to promote it, as well as external to all of our partners, teaching and learning committees, project groups, student focus groups, all sorts of different bits and pieces. And this ties very nicely into the dialogue and discourse. Again, if you look at our advisors and our reviewers, our external examiner for this program is one of our advisors. So when they see the impact, hopefully touch wood, when they see the impact that this program will do, they can influence the program going forward, and hopefully influence their own programs internally within their own organization. The teaching and learning practices, it goes without saying we're going to be changing those. And what I would see from my experience with similar programs is students want one to go back. They don't want to go back to the old way, so inevitably our teaching and learning practices are impacted on. And as I say, when Theresa goes training for this module, she's going to take that into all the other programs she works with. And psychology is taught across the disciplines in DCU, and indeed it's taught across the entire sector. So because of the openness of this project, we're more than willing and hopefully will generate loads of partners to change teaching and learning practices throughout. The same principles apply for the staff teams. I'll finish up now because it's a very subtle sign. I'll finish up now by saying that the project involves developing staff. That's what it's about. Consequences will be enhancing one program, but I would see by developing staff to this project, we will be improving all of our programs in a sustainable and impactful way. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.