CMAster Project Deliverable 3.

6b:

Salford Pilot Module

Version History
Version

Date

Change

Author(s)

1.0

20 Mar 2014

First Draft

Steve Preece

1.1

5 May 2014

Approved

Richard Baker

Contents
Version History ............................................................................................................................. 1
Contents....................................................................................................................................... 1
Aim .............................................................................................................................................. 1
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 2
2 Content of the module ................................................................................................................ 2
3 Online learning and organisation of the module ........................................................................... 3
4 Assessment and feedback ........................................................................................................... 3
5 Workload ................................................................................................................................... 4
6 Overall satisfaction ..................................................................................................................... 5
7 General comments ..................................................................................................................... 5
8 Reflection and Recommendations ................................................................................................ 6
Expectations and entry requirements .......................................................................................... 6
Assessments ............................................................................................................................. 6
Virtual classrooms ...................................................................................................................... 7

Aim
This is a pilot of a whole 30 credit (approx. 15 ECTS) module taught by part-time work-based
distance learning from the University of Salford between September 2013 and January 2014. The bulk
of this deliverable is the report of an evaluation of this module based on a questionnaire based
assessment of student opinion.

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication
(communication) reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held
responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

1 Introduction
The University of Salfords distance learning Masters Programme in Clinical Gait Analysis commenced
in September 2013. This is a stand-alone programme open to students from anywhere in the world.
From September 2014 it will form the basis of the University of Salfords involvement in the CMAster
programme. European students will then be able to opt to combine the taught component of this
programme with a research project conducted at either VU Amsterdam or KU Leuven to be awarded
an MSc in Clinical Movement Analysis with this period of mobility recorded in their Diploma
Supplement. The first semester of the MSc in Clinical Gait Analysis has thus been used as a pilot of
one module of the new MSc in Clinical Movement Analysis. This report is of the evaluation of this pilot
module.
A total of seven students enrolled onto this module, two of whom were based in the UK, with the
remaining five being based across Europe, Africa and the USA. The programme is part time consists
of a single module delivered each semester. The first module, titled "Measuring Walking, was
focused around fundamental issues related to clinical gait analysis, and specifically focused on
developing students knowledge and understanding of measurement theory, data capture skills and
also their awareness of measurement limitations. The online teaching material was delivered via
Blackboard and students were given a range of teaching materials and self-directed learning tasks
each week. These tasks typically required the students to collect some laboratory data and upload it
onto a forum for class discussion. Each week there was a two-hour virtual classroom during which
students were able to ask questions about that weeks learning material, reflect on their experiences
the practical exercise and also discussion the data which had been uploaded on the discussion forum.
The module was completed in January 2014 and detailed feedback obtained from six out of the seven
students enrolled on module. This feedback is described in detail below.

2 Content of the module

Students were asked to provide feedback on their perception of the content of the module, both in
the form of a rating for individual aspects and also with specific comments. This feedback is
summarised below.
Very
satisfied

Satisfied

The range of topics covered in the module?

The amount of material covered in each weekly

session?

The amount of self-learning in the module?

The quality of the teaching?

The support received from the teaching staff?

Dissatisfied

Very
dissatisfied

In general the students had a very positive view of the module content; with some stating that it
provided a thorough review of all basic elements and that is was highly appropriate for the learning
objectives. However, there were a number of students who felt that the material was covered too
quickly and that there was sometimes insufficient time to really focus on individual topics in detail.
These differences reflected the differing abilities of the students, some of whom required more time
to understand basic concepts before embarking on the laboratory exercises. To ensure this is
addressed in future, additional information will be provided on:

2 | D3.6b Salford pilot module

How to import data into excel and how to create graphs in Excel
How to use Excel to perform simple calculations, such as SD and RMS
Physics forces, moments, wave forms
More statistics-related material, such as interpreting P values.

3 Online learning and organisation of the module

Students were also asked to rate their experiences of the online learning and the organisation of the
module, again through scored answers and specific comments. Note that, for this module, students
were given specific learning tasks each week at 5pm on a Friday. They were then required to collect
some laboratory data and to upload this data for discussion at the virtual classroom (delivered via the
Blackboard Collaborate software) which was held on the following Wednesday.

Very
satisfied

Satisfied

Quality and organisation of the blackboard site

Accessibility of additional reading (including e-books)

to support learning

Structure of the individual weekly sessions

Self-learning tasks which were discussed at the

weekly virtual classroom sessions

Weekly collaborate sessions

Dissatisfied

Very
dissatisfied

Very positive feedback was reported by most students in relation to the learning materials with some
students perceiving the online learning resources to be excellent, innovative and varied with effective
use of screencasts. Students were also positive about the weekly virtual classrooms as it enabled
them to revisit previous learning material and also provided a great way of interacting and getting
to know professionally the rest of the cohort. However, one student felt that there was sometimes
too much focus on laboratory problems which were unique to a specific individual and that this could
mean less time on more structured learning tasks. Furthermore, there were a small number of
technical issues identified, including videos on Youtube not working well and restricted access to the
University of Salford library system (Solar). Some students also felt that it would have been more
helpful to have access to the learning tasks before the Friday to ensure they could timetable sufficient
time in their laboratory. In fact one study suggested that all this material should have been available
at the start of the module. Similarly others felt that the virtual classroom should be on the Thursday
instead of the Wednesday. These specific comments on timetabling are under consideration and
changes will be made to ensure that students have sufficient time to carry out each weeks learning
task before the virtual classroom.

4 Assessment and feedback

There were two different assessments for this module. The first was a series of portfolio entries for
which students were required to write both about the material covered and their learning experience
after each weekly session. The other was an exercise in collecting, processing and interpreting some
normative laboratory kinematic data. This exercise required them to work both individually and as a
group. Again, students provided feedback on this aspect of the module which is summarised below.

3 | D3.6b Salford pilot module

Very
clear

Clear

Unclear

The assessments for this module

The assessment dates for this module

What you needed to do to achieve a good mark?

Very
unclear

Most students felt the instructions and feedback for the two assessments were clear. However, there
were a few minor issues which were identified which could help improve clarity in future. Specifically,
one student felt that it was extremely difficult to show in assignments how the virtual learning
environment had been used and felt that this aspect of the module could have been more
appropriately assessed by using more conventional methods and participation during the virtual
classroom. Another student felt that there were too many portfolio entries which were sometimes
hard to write and that more guidance was required on the expected in the content of these entries.
Furthermore, it was suggested that the word count of the portfolio entries should be increased for
students to be able to fully capture what they had learned and also reflect on their learning
experience. For the second assessment (normative data collection), one student complained that
insufficient feedback was given and so it was difficult to know how to improve in future assignments.
These issues of providing clearer instruction and feedback are being considered carefully for the next
academic year.

5 Workload
Students were asked to estimate the average number of hours they spend each week on the module
and to comment on any specific workload-related issues.

How many hours of study, outside of online sessions,

do you estimate you spent per week on this module?

More
than 20

15-20

10-15

Fewer
than 10

A number of students felt the workload was heavier than they had anticipated. This reflected the fact
that many were in full time professional employment and this module was designed so that students
needed to complete approximately 20 hours of study each week, including a portfolio entry reflecting
on their weekly learning experiences. Additionally, one student complained that her inexperience with
technical/computer related matters required her to spend additional time working on the module.
However, most students agreed that the weekly deadlines provided welcome continuous motivation
will allowed them to maintain a steady pace throughout the module and ensured that they did not fall
behind with the work schedule. The addition of the normative data exercise led to an increase in
workload and one student felt it may have been better to have two separate deadlines, one for each
assessment, with one before charismas and the other after Christmas.

4 | D3.6b Salford pilot module

6 Overall satisfaction
The high scores, recorded below, demonstrated that the students felt very engaged and were also
highly satisfied by the module.

Very
engaging

Engaging

Very
satisfied

Satisfied

Not
engaging

Very
disengaging

Dissatisfied

Very
dissatisfied

How engaging was this module for you?

(E.g. you wanted to log on every week as it was
really interesting, wanted to read more about the
subject etc.)

How satisfied are you overall with this module?

7 General comments
In line with the high levels of satisfaction reported above, students identified a number of aspects of
the module which they felt enhanced their learning experience. These included weekly learning
materials which were developed by staff with a range of different backgrounds. These materials
enabled them to develop an in-depth understanding of biomechanical measurement and also to
develop critical but yet reflective approach to learning. Students also felt the weekly practical tasks
were very useful and allowed them to to relate the taught theory to the practical application and also
to greatly enhance their data handling skills. They also felt they were able to get an improved
appreciation of how things should be done in a gait laboratory and to develop rigorous protocols
which had the potential to improve the day-to-day running of their own gait laboratories.
Students felt the peer-to-peer interaction was vital in enabling them to enhance their learning,
especially given the different professional background of each student which facilitated greater
knowledge exchange. They also felt that the two assessments helped them to develop their academic
writing skills. Finally, one student commented on the online nature of the programme and felt that
this was an ideal way to learn as it enabled me to continue with paid work whilst at the same time
completing the module.
Although there was a consistent level of positive feedback from all six students, a number of
suggestions were put forward for how the module could be improved in future. These included a
more regular virtual classroom (more than once per week) with more time spent on specific topics,
such as kinetics and EMG. Others suggested that the workload would be more manageable if the
virtual classroom was later in the week, preferably a Thursday, which would allow more time to
complete the designated tasks before discussion. Other suggestions included having the material on
blackboard in a downloadable format, such as PPT or pdf rather than using interactive web
documents, created using the Wimba software.
Some students felt that there was too big a discrepancy between the number and time demand of
the tasks across the different weeks and that sometimes it was not possible to go through all the
material in detail every week. Others felt that the timing of the material could be improved. The
module was delivered in weekly blocks in which specific learning tasks were released to the students
on the Friday evening at 5pm. It was suggested that this meant there was no natural end of the week
as material was released before the previous set of exercises had been completed. A final criticism
was that, when copying and pasting materials into Blackboard formatting was lost, and this made
entering material for the portfolios difficult.
5 | D3.6b Salford pilot module

8 Reflection and Recommendations

This general tone of this evaluation is that students are satisfied or very satisfied with the module as
delivered. It is thus recommended that the module be provided in future in essentially the same
format. The following recommendations relate to a number of specific areas where improvements are
considered possible in the light of concerns expressed by students.
Expectations and entry requirements
A number of comments relating to workload, the nature of the learning tasks, availability of lab-time
and required technical skills can be linked to the cohort of students enrolling being somewhat
different to that anticipated. It was anticipated that students would health professionals already
working in clinical gait analysis services with the support of their employers (and hence of
colleagues). It was thus assumed that they would have ready access both to laboratory facilities and
local technical support. It was also assumed that they would have considerable familiarity with the
basic processes of data capture, processing and interpretation. In reality 3 of the 7 students had very
little prior experience of clinical gait analysis and 2 of these had considerably less local support than
had been assumed. It was clear that attaining competencies that had been assumed as well as the
specified learning activities was a considerable challenge for this sub-group leading to high workloads.
A related issue is that of comments about technical skills in using packages such as Excel. All
students had signed a declaration that included they had good information technology literacy

including skills in: word-processing, data manipulation and visualization (chart plotting) within
spreadsheets, preparation of presentations. It is clear that several students did not have these skills.

This situation had been pre-empted with an Induction Pack which suggested a number of Preparatory
Exercises that would allow students to start developing their existing competencies in a number of
areas before start of the semester. Unfortunately a number of technical problems with the admissions
system meant that most students registered very late and did not have time to use the Induction
Pack as intended.
There has been discussion as to whether expectations of students upon enrolment in the highlighted
areas should be incorporated in a formal entry requirement which could be tested in some way. The
practical difficulties of such a formal process are considerable and on balance it is considered
preferable to address the issue by providing even clearer guidance on what is required and a more
structured programme of pre-course activities to support students to prepare themselves.
Recommendations:
1. Documentation (particularly on the University Web-site) should be amended to make the
expectations of students even clearer.
2. Pre-course learning materials should be provided independently of the applications process to
enable students to acquire specific competencies requires to support learning once registered.
3. Consideration be given to developing a level 6 module which might be considered as a formal
prerequisite for any student not already employed in a clinical gait analysis service.
Assessments
It is clear that some students thought that there could have been more clarity in the learning tasks
and what is required to get a good mark. This had already been expressed as a concern of the
teaching staff and attributed to the intended learning outcomes specified in the original module
specification and upon which the Assessment Grids had been based. The outcomes are too specific to
the content of learning and whereas a focus on the quality and nature of learning would be more
appropriate.

6 | D3.6b Salford pilot module

Recommendations:
4. Intended learning objectives be re-written to more clearly specify the nature and quality of
learning required.
5. Assessment Specifications (particularly but not only the assessment grids) be revised to
reflect the new learning outcomes.
Virtual classrooms
Our understanding of the virtual classrooms has evolved over the first semester. It is now clear that
they are best used as a time for reflecting on the learning activities that students have engaged in
earlier in the week (rather than an opportunity for presenting more material). With this understanding
it is clearly beneficial to have the sessions as late in the week as possible.
Recommendations:
6. The virtual classroom be held on a Thursday evening in future years.

7 | D3.6b Salford pilot module