Our Managing Partner, Helen Carville, was honoured to be invited by the University of Northampton to participate in the Periodic Subject Review of the undergraduate degrees in Law, to offer an employer’s perspective on ensuring that the courses remain up to date and relevant. Read about her experience here
I was proud and honoured (although must confess to having also felt a little old!) to be asked by my own alma mater to join a panel to conduct the Periodic Subject Review of both their LL.B. (Honours) and BA Law with Criminology, as well as the Joint Honours programme.
I was one of three external panel members; two from other academic institutions, and me as a potential employer of the graduates they produce. There were also three internal panel members from other parts of the University. Our role was to evaluate the degree programmes on offer (both content and delivery) and suggest outcomes ranging from discontinuing the courses, to approving them to move forward and anything in between. My role specifically was to offer the perspective of an employer and comment on what I want to see in graduates who arrive with us in due course, making suggestions or recommendations as to how (if at all!) the courses and their delivery might be tailored to improve student outcomes and employability.
The first stage was to receive and consider a fairly vast body of documentation. In view of my long absence from academia my contact was kind enough to signpost those which had particular relevance to the task at hand which really helped me to get to grips with what was required. Most of the peripheral documents were very useful as a point of reference.
Over a period of two days we then had the privilege of meeting with a cohort of students, all of the subject team representatives, senior Faculty members and other university staff including marketing teams and student services. We were given the opportunity to ask questions and discuss many different elements of the degree provision from student recruitment and diversity right through to methods of assessment at the end. We heard from students around their experiences.
What struck me most about the whole process was the vast amount of detail and consideration which goes into every single module offered, every method of assessment, every interaction with students. The collaboration between teaching and academic research and Ph.D study was also very interesting to see, and the sincere and dedicated attention given to supporting and guiding students throughout every stage of their learning (including offering substantial practical assistance with “juggling” external constraints such as part-time work and caring responsibilities) was clear.
After some discussion by the panel we unanimously agreed that the courses and methods of delivery and assessment were very strong. The support offered to students was substantial and freely given, and the general team and sense of belonging underpinned the whole process. We made some relatively minor recommendations (in part just to show we were listening) to tweak some areas where we felt that improvement could be made, but we also made some significant commendations on the many areas of excellent practice we encountered.
Overall this was a great opportunity. Having gone from terrified first day fresher student to participating in a Periodic Subject Review of the subject which I was taught in less than 30 short years was a privilege and a fabulous experience. I will be very honoured if they invite me back to the next review in 6 years’ time.
