Instructors themselves are pushing for curriculum changes

Intensive debates are currently taking place at UCT Prague on the transformation of instructional content and forms. What ignited the debate?

We’ve been discussing change for some time, since roughly the end of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which online instruction and video recordings of lectures were possible in addition to face-to-face instruction. Before, university standards only allowed this for distance learning programmes. In 2022 and 2023, Czech public universities participated together in two projects focused on educational quality. For about a year, we have been intensively dealing with the topic of high dropout rates (especially in the first semester), under the guidance of Associate Professor Rubešová. This year’s highlight, in my opinion, was Richard Nevšímal's excellent lecture at the Instructors’ Club about Generation Z, which includes our current students, and Generation Alpha, kids now in primary and secondary schools. In comparison to previous generations, these generations learn differently. They have shorter attention spans, it’s often difficult to engage them, and so on. On the other hand, they’re certainly not less intelligent. They like to use new communication technologies and just receive and process information differently than previous generations did.

It is now up to us instructors to modify instructional formats and content to meet the specific habits of the incoming generation without abandoning “UCT Prague DNA”, i.e. the high professional quality of our graduates. We must newly define what we expect and require from our graduates in order to truly enable them to reach the necessary level of professional knowledge and skills, and this has to be done for each level of study and study programme.

We are currently facing a situation where students learn many things in their first core courses. These courses are often focused on memorization, without ties to practical applications. Three months or later, when they have to apply the acquired knowledge in follow-up courses, they often have difficulties. Due to the large amount of information and their inability of properly anchoring and applying knowledge, they simply forget what they learned before.

Can you specify what topics of study will be revised at UCT Prague?

First, we have to quantify—and we are already taking a number of steps in this direction—the real time burden of individual courses. We are currently analysing the common Bachelor curriculum from this point of view. We are compiling what the students must master in order to prepare for an exam or a paper, i.e. how much time it realistically takes, both studying and other preparations.

How are “real” time requirements quantified?

We know the amount of schoolwork time assigned to each UCT Prague class from the course schedule. This September, a project kicked off in which course guarantors will revise what they objectively require from students, in terms of credits, papers, exams, and so on. After this, we will try to obtain data by surveying and analysing what students say about how much time they really invest in “homework” preparations necessary for successful fulfilment of all the requirements.

The next step will be an analysis of the continuity and substantiality of the courses, whether there are any instructional overlaps, or, on the contrary, “useless” topics that students will never use after exams. Instructors and trainers themselves feel that students are missing certain connections and links, even between topics within their course of study, which has been confirmed by student surveys on courses.

How difficult will it be to put all of this together? We have a lot of courses and study programmes…

The guarantors of individual study programmes will play a key role. Revamping individual courses should not be that hard, but it might be difficult to take a critical and holistic look at what is really essential for students to know and carry with them from their studies (that is, what is optional or what students could learn otherwise, e.g. through elective courses and e-learning). How can we appropriately combine courses in a curriculum so that students have room/time for both necessary competencies and electives? It is a big challenge, but makes a lot of sense. I consider it essential that the pressure for change comes from the instructors themselves. A number of them have become members of the Instructors’ Club and the Academic Senate’s education committee is very active and constructive. Some guarantors of study programmes are already thinking about how to innovate their curricula.

How should this complicated process optimally transpire?

In a few days, we will meet with guarantors (editor’s note: this interview took place on September 2) and explain our ideas. Together with them, we will propose an optimal path forward, according to what is necessary and what is actually possible. There will be series of meetings between subject guarantors, guarantors of specialized courses, and study programme guarantors. To start, key requirements (what knowledge and competences graduates of a programme should have) will be defined. We will continue on from this.

So will you circle back from the ultimate objectives to modifying basic subjects in programmes?

Yes, otherwise the transformation of instruction at UCT Prague is meaningless. Even if the whole process will ultimately go both ways, graduates’ competencies take the priority, but competencies must complement courses.

Who’s responsibility is coordination of the transformation?

At the faculty level, definitely the Vice-Deans’ for Education, who are very hard working, competent and easy to cooperate with. The Rector and Deans, with whom we have discussed our plans, also agree with the need for change. The coordination of the whole process is then up to me with the support of the Department of Education and Counselling and Career Centre in very close connection with the Deans, Vice-Deans, and guarantors.

But when push comes to shove, conservative sentiments will surely be voiced: we had to learn this or that “back in the day” and this knowledge is essential, a UCT Prague graduate must be universal…

Yes, we count on that. But as was said in the aforementioned lecture about Generations Z and Alpha: we older generations judge new ones according to rules that are sometimes 50 years old. The world is changing rapidly. After two years of the pandemic, younger cohorts of students have shown they really learn differently, perceive differently, process information differently… If I were to give an example from my generation: I wouldn’t have liked it if someone forced me to use a slide rule when we had calculators. We can’t just teach the same thing for 50 years. But we cannot make changes ad hoc; we must have data and analyse it. As chemists, we know that when the properties of an input raw material change, we have to adjust the technological process adequately if we still want to have a quality product at the end. And we are witnessing a significant change of “properties” of the students who come to UCT Prague from secondary schools.

A beautiful analogy. From what we’ve discussed so far, I feel that, in addition to changes in instructional formats, a reduction in content is also unavoidable.

Yes. But I add to this that, on the other side of the equation, there must be a deeper understanding and long-term ability of future graduates to apply the acquired essential skills and knowledge. Our objective is certainly not to trivialize studies, but to modernize them while maintaining the high quality standards that employers have always valued in UCT Prague graduates.

Speaking of employers: surveys indicate that if students lack anything, it’s so-called transferable skills.

We currently offer such courses, but it turns out that students do not have time to complete such courses on top of their primary workloads. So change will definitely be necessary, but we are not at the stage now where I can define what form anything will take. What I can say is that we are talking about the possibility of implementing some transferable skills training directly into core subject courses where it makes sense. It is pointless to have separate courses on teamwork or project management when a study programme can be set up so that students acquire these skills and apply them straight away.

When will all of this be implemented?

The accreditation of a large number of study programmes ends in October 2028, and the objective is that the reaccredited study programmes will already be in updated form. It may seem like a long time from now, but the opposite is true. In order to meet accreditation rules and deadlines, we need to have our plans finalized by the beginning of the next academic year. We can introduce partial changes for the better, not tied to accreditation, on an ongoing basis.

When I think about the whole process of instructional change, it is evident that the guarantors of study programmes, who have a lot of freedom and, at the same time, high levels of responsibility, will play a crucial role.

 Is there some kind of institutional support as well as quality control for the guarantors of study programmes ensuring that the new teaching principles are included in all curricula across the university?

Communication with guarantors, of course, is in the domain of the respective Faculty Deans and Vice-Deans for Education. At the same time, I will communicate with them during the preparatory process and they will have methodological and administrative support during the accreditation process from their Department of Education. Guarantors will also be provided with all relevant information from the UCT Prague Computer Centre so that they have hard data on hand. In addition, they are often surrounded by other colleagues in their departments who provide them with support on a peer-to-peer basis, including a critical feedback.

You have mentioned surveys, the results of which you rely on. Can you summarize how students can provide feedback at UCT Prague?

Students have several surveys available, like those course-related ones where they evaluate instructional content and their instructors. There are also surveys for particular study programmes, where substantiality, overlaps, and so on are identified. The Counselling and Career Centre, in cooperation with the Data Centre, conducts surveys for graduates. Students also have the opportunity to directly address their tutors or their Academic Senate representatives.

I will return for a moment to barriers to transforming instruction. Besides feelings and “conservatism”, do you think there are other barriers?

Time and space. For example, as an instructor, if I want to change my course and add project-based teaching, I must have adequate preparation space to repeatedly think, try, and adjust to the concept. In addition, when it comes to lecturing itself, this kind of project-based instruction places greater demands on my class preparation time than traditional lecturing for two hours a week would. In terms of greater scheduling flexibility with a large number of available electives, space capacities as well as the time-burden on instructors play a role. Universities that teach this way confirm that, in addition to being more time consuming, it’s a more financially demanding way to operate than when everything is traditionally structured around core courses and compulsory electives. On top of it, there’s the ongoing issue of the schedule, which is already terribly complicated to create because we have a large number of laboratory courses and compulsory electives while having few large or medium-sized lecture halls and limited laboratory spaces. But I believe that introduction of different forms of instruction would be solution for this problem as well.

Have you discussed your plans with UCT Prague’s International Advisory Board?

Yes, we talk about their experiences, because at many of the Board members’ institutions, they have been conducting various forms of teaching long enough to know the pros and cons. They also say that they are keeping their fingers crossed for us, because we have a lot of hard work ahead of us (laughs).

What has interested you the most in discussions so far?

When the Board’s Chair, Jarka Glassy, ​​said that we must have gone crazy letting a Full or an Associate Professor only teach three-four students in a regular core course, because it makes no economic sense at all. We will certainly put on the table the topic of a minimum number of students required for UCT Prague courses. A solution might be in abovementioned introduction of a larger number of electives with defined capacities. So, in the case that, say, only three students sign up for a class, the course would be cancelled. And vice versa: in the case of too many students, preference will be given to those who, say, have better grades. Which is also a good secondary motivation for having good grades during one’s studies. I think that setting a lower course size threshold will also help us eliminate certain redundancies when the courses with the same content or on the same topics are taught simultaneously at several departments for no apparent reason.

One of the recent innovations for instructors is the establishment of the Centre for the Development of Instructional Competencies (CEPKO). What does it offer to instructors?

Primarily methodological support in the field of didactics, which we will centralize in the form of e-learning courses and webinars as well as instructional, advice, and sharing experiences forums. Furthermore, CEPKO will offer methodical guidance/help upon demand if, say, as an instructor, I feel that my lectures or exercises are not working according to my plans and expectations or that something else is wrong. Through CEPKO, I would have the opportunity to arrange a visit from a more experienced colleague who would provide me with feedback and help me through their own teaching expertise and experiences. CEPKO’s creation is a reaction to the fact that if we demand professionalism and competence from our instructors, we must be able to support and educate them in advanced teaching methods and practices.