Content area
This article focuses on the MSc in management development at Edge Hill. It describes the environment in which the programme was developed and takes particular account of some of the different strands of management learning discussed in the literature and how these issues have informed the development of the programme. This article provides a sample of course members' views of the programme matched against their personal objectives for their participation in the programme and the impact on their careers as a consequence of their participation. Evidence from both the literature and from the empirical study will contribute to a view as to whether the MSc in Management Development at Edge Hill is merely a programme in management or whether indeed it is a management development process.
Full text
Keywords
Management development, Learning, Case studies
Abstract
Focuses on the MSc in management development at Edge Hill. Describes the environment in which the programme was developed and takes particular account of some of the different strands of management learning discussed in the literature and how these issues have informed the development of the programme. Provides a sample of course members' views of the programme matched against their personal objectives for their participation in the programme and the impact on their careers as a consequence of their participation. Evidence from both the literature and from the empirical study will contribute to a view as to whether the MSc in Management Development at Edge Hill is merely a programme in management or whether indeed it is a management development process.
Electronic access
The research register for this journal is available at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregisters
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0040-0912.htm
Introduction
This paper sets out to explore the experience and the reaction of course members and graduates of the Edge Hill MSc in management development through the application of both empirical evidence and critical reflection. It goes on to examine the programme philosophy, the learning and teaching approach and the effectiveness of the programme in terms of the participants' personal advancement and their career development.
It is important, however, to establish some common understanding as to the nature and meaning of management development. This is a term that has been used to cover a wide range of learning activity both in an organisational context and through interventions by both the academic management education world and the world of trainers and consultants. The problem for this study perhaps, is that this term has almost become a generic term that covers a whole range of diverse learning, training and developmental activities. Indeed, Thompson et al. (2001) make this point emphatically in their attempt to operationalise the term "management development". They argue that management development is a holistic process that not only embraces those aspects identified above but also requires what the authors describe as a:
... wider process than the formal learning of knowledge and skills, which includes informal and experiential modes of human capital formation (Thompson et al., 2001, p. 10).
Indeed it might be argued that a key outcome of effective management development is that the participant is able to move to a deeper level of learning. Argyris (1977) describes this transition from "single loop" to "double loop" learning. The aim of the Edge Hill programme is for participants to ascribe the highest level of learning in the model developed by Choueke et al. (1994, p. 43) in which the outcome of: "development is connected with learner autonomy and responsibility". In a different context, West and Barnes (2000, p. 1239) offer a typology for skills related to "the learning organisation". Their typology of learning includes "systematic problem solving", "experimentation", "drawing on memory" and "past experience", "learning from and with others", "effective communication" and "systems thinking". West and Burnes' typology provides an additional view of the qualities associated with higher level learning in the context of the individual manager. Perhaps a process that facilitates the development of higher order skills and deeper levels of learning for managers might be a platform for differentiation between management education, training and management development? (See also, Garavan, 1997.)
Taking the foregoing as a basis for understanding the nature of management development as a process, the key question for this paper is how far the MSc in management development programme at Edge Hill matches that understanding? It is clear to the authors that the rapid rate of change experienced by both organisations and managers has created in many cases feelings of uncertainty and disorientation, with managers feeling increasingly remote from organisational objectives as well as having to cope with a raft of other complicated emotions. Perhaps a programme that draws managers away from their workplace on a weekly basis, and provides a forum and exchange with both the academic team as well as with managers from different sectors, brings with it a sense of proportion and limits feelings of isolation for course members?
The Edge Hill MSc process
Management programmes at Edge Hill were launched in 1990 with an innovative and creative approach that enabled students to manage the tension between theory and practice through a teaching and learning model that encouraged personal growth through a range of learning media. Experiential learning and student centred learning both played a key role in this process, and the final year of the programme was largely activity and group work focused. A number of the final year assessments were also group orientated and this model facilitated negotiation, strategy formation, planning and a team culture amongst the students. A central learning feature of this programme was the Executive car market simulation that provided the students with the opportunity to manage a business in a dynamic virtual market (see Choueke and Armstrong, 1992).
The key aims of the Edge Hill management development programme focus on the development of the individual manager through several levels of interaction within a climate of continuing change and uncertainty. The programme sessions provide a safe environment for participants to self-develop, to interact through group learning and action learning alongside fellow course members. The process provides a vehicle for course members to develop a greater understanding of learning and research processes, particularly their own learning, and then move to a more critical view of their own management performance and an expansion of their ability to evaluate the performance their peers.
It is envisaged that the learning process developed from participants' experience on the programme can be transferred into their organisations and become a platform for continuous development within their work context. The development of learning communities through action learning within the year groups of the programme, as well as with the faculty, also provide an effective model for furthering this process in the course members' work settings.
A soft systems approach to management learning has been the dominant paradigm in the department since its inception. However the development of learning models and curriculum has been organic as the staffing base has increased alongside the growth in student numbers and changes in their learning as well as their vocational needs.
The philosophy behind the development of the programme
The programme development was predicated on the view that continuing personal learning and empowerment for managers (Rogers, 1996), together with effective interaction with their peer group in their organisation, provides a positive platform for managing their working lives as well as providing a basis for developing their management careers. A significant focus of management research within the learning literature over the past 20 years has linked the development of learning in a management context with organisational change. The benefits of continuous learning as an effective contributor to managing change as well as developing a deeper understanding of some of the key drivers of change both within the organisation and outside of the organisation enable a more effective response to change. It was felt that a programme whose ideology, curriculum and operation encouraged and facilitated the development of learning would offer an effective niche in the over developed and still expanding market for post graduate and post experience management learning.
Much of the early discussion on the development of an appropriate teaching and learning strategy for the programme was predicated on three models. These models are briefly reviewed in the following paragraphs.
The first, a triangulation model (see Figure 1), links participant self-development (Pedler, 1991) with the learning experience gained within the management school setting. That learning emanates from the course members, the school faculty and the programme itself. In terms of the Edge Hill programme, the action learning sets provide an effective means for reflection. The third aspect is the learning environment of the course members' organisations that provides the opportunity for active work based learning (Raelin, 2001) and the opportunity to develop formal or informal action learning within their own organisation. The model suggests that the most effective learning takes place when the experience of each of the three aspects (individual, school and work-based learning) are mutually reinforcing (Choueke and Armstrong, 1992).
The second learning model (see Figure 2) on which the programme was developed demonstrates the relationship between the course member, both as a member of the learning group within the programme (Self 1) and as a member of a working group within his or her organisation (Self 2). The model then proposes that both the activity from programme and from the participants' organisations impact on wider society. In turn, societal developments impact on organisations, the individual manager, and indeed on the learning groups within the programme. Course members therefore have the opportunity to test out their relationships, the dynamics within the group and their personal impacts on the learning community in a relatively safe learning and social environment.
The third model (see Figure 3) demonstrates the interaction of perspectives on management and management development that represent the key elements of the programme. Change, personal development, learning, corporate responsibility, sustainability and corporate direction were identified as key perspectives for the programme within a developmental learning framework. The interaction of those elements with international perspectives, the changing nature of work, the changing nature of organisations and futurity, pointed the course team towards the development of an appropriate curriculum.
The delivery of the curriculum is through the development of active learning, both for the course members and for the team, as well as the facilitation of participants' ability to critically analyse course material. Course members are also encouraged to reflect on aspects and challenges from their workplace and to use critical incidents as an effective learning medium.
Gentles research within two post 1992 universities focusing on their approaches to teaching and learning is resonant in the context under discussion. He uses the learning organization metaphor and suggests that the development of a "strong learning culture" provided an opportunity for the classroom to become: "a metaphor for the challenge, excitement and learning opportunity of the professional world" (Gentle, 2001, p. 21).
Gentle (2001, p. 20) suggests that the development of a distinctive learning culture provides an effective environment for students to take responsibility for their own learning. However, the author demonstrates a paradox, that of the "hierarchical, efficiency driven cultures" extant in the current higher education environment, and their business and management departments promoting organisational learning and the learning organization model as good practice for the wider organisational environment.
The theoretical underpinnings of the Edge Hill learning process
As the programme has developed, so too has the staffing base expanded as well as the diversity of course members. Course members are drawn from the public, private, as well as the voluntary sector. Managers as well as newly graduating young people work together effectively, in both the more formal sessions, as well as in the action learning sets. The combination of the significant operational experience of (sometimes) long-- standing managers with the relatively idealistic view of new graduates generates a mutually effective learning environment.
Concomitant with the expansion of programme participants, there has also been an expansion of the teaching and learning processes that have been developed and adopted. However, many of the teaching and learning approaches for the programme remain experiential in nature. The platform modules "The reflective management practitioner" and the "Management of change" involve action learning processes developed from the work of Revans (1982) and later refined by Pedler (1991). Whilst much of the learning and reflective focus in the earlier stages of the programme is group orientated, course members are expected to undertake a critical and reflective individual work based learning exercise in the period between year one and year two. This mini research project demands that participants draw from concepts explored in the year one modules to interrogate an organisational issue or problem, and then to reflect upon the effectiveness of the theoretical concepts as a means of explaining organisational or management behaviour. The recent development of the model for work based learning has been informed by the work of Raelin (2001), who perceives the model of reflective work based learning as a key instrument for continuing management development.
The reflection process, particularly in terms of the Reflective Management Practitioner module, resembles the work of Mazen et al. (2000) discussed in their paper entitled "Transforming the class into a learning organization". Their process of analysing weekly student evaluations and reflections provided "a system that transformed students into partners in the learning process" (Mazen et al., 2000, p. 159).
Raelin (2000, p. 19) in his innovative text on work based learning as a management development medium also contributes to this discussion:
Experience alone does not predetermine practitioners' use of reflective practices; rather, it is how one uses experience that is critical to understanding why some individuals use reflection to grow in their professional learning (Raelin, 2000 p. 19).
However, the effective use of reflective practice for managers is a high level skill that requires development and practice and for many the process is one that creates its own difficulties. Indeed, Smith (2001, p. 34) points out that:
Reflection does not come naturally or even easily to most managers and executives that the author deals with. Indeed most case [sic], explicit attempts to encourage adoption of learning and reflective practices through either logical explanations or development sessions have been largely unsuccessful.
The programme in action
The current programme comprises six taught modules over four semesters, a work based learning assignment and a research dissertation that is the concluding piece of work for the programme. The design of the curriculum is scheduled to provide course members with a subject as well as a methodological base in the first semester through two modules, "The reflective management practitioner" and "Managing change". The second semester work focuses on strategy and decision-making and research methods and then the work based learning element. Semester three focuses on "Management and corporate responsibility" and semester four the "Future of work". The three months following the completion of the taught elements of the programme provide space for the completion of the research dissertation.
The design and content of the curriculum represents perspectives on management rather than functions of management as is common in traditional postgraduate management programmes. These perspectives are drawn from across a wide spectrum of management literature and take a discursive rather than a more traditional "how to do it" approach. The programme content and the management of the programme are premised on the view that there is no one best way in management and of managing. The programme provides a vehicle for reflection on practice in different organisational contexts, as well as offering opportunity for critical analysis of theoretical perspectives on related issues through seminar and discussion. The use of action learning in the sessions and then informally outside of the sessions complements these processes. Participants who have produced better than average results in course work, dissertation work and who have enhanced their personal effectiveness have been those who extended the use of action learning beyond those sessions time-tabled for the programme.
A key facet of the programme is facilitation for the development of a range of higher management skills for participants. These skills focus on group approaches to problem solving, research, critical thinking, flexibility and the ability to break out of a "one best way" approach in their day to day management work. The programme also provides the means for participants to work beyond the trap of what Schein (1996, p. 10) describes as "major occupational cultures" within organisations. It provides participants with the means to see and to operate beyond their work culture and to perhaps liberate themselves from the constraints of their personal or professional paradigm.
The assessment programme has been developed to extend the learning experience as well as to ensure that participants have satisfied the module and programme learning outcomes. The assessments provide course members with opportunities for bringing work related issues and problems into their analyses and discussion and perhaps through that process, begin to unpack some of the problematic situations generated through the complexities of contemporary management and organisational experience.
Course members' perceptions of the programme
In order to elicit a clearer understanding of participants' feelings regarding the programme as well as a picture as to their perception of the key benefits derived from it, a short semi-structured questionnaire was developed and distributed to course participants from distinct year groups. The questions focused on course members' original objectives for participating in the programme and whether those objectives had been satisfied. They were asked to identify what changes had taken place in their careers since embarking on the programme, if or how their approach to managing had changed and what they considered to be the most positive aspects as well as the least positive aspects of the programme.
Responses were received from members of the 1999 graduating group, the 2000 second year group, the 2000 year one group and the 2001 year one group.
A sample of the responses from the questionnaire survey are shown in the Appendix.
Discussion
If we consider the course members' responses against the authors' attempt to operationalise the term "management development", it can be seen that many of the responses indicate a personal change in both the course members' view of themselves and of their management work. Several responses suggest that course members take a more critical and reflective approach to their work. A number have also indicated a greater understanding of their own learning preferences and style, and others, a more effective approach to learning from experience. Significantly, a number of course members have moved their careers forward, even in the early stages of the programme, and have identified aspects of the programme that have contributed towards effectiveness in an interview situation and that have enhanced their self-confidence and performance in their new job.
However, a caveat. Thompson et al. (2001) indicate the need for care in a methodological sense. In critiquing their own survey of 500 individual members of the Association of MBAs, the authors warn that individual graduates or participants might well reflect on their experience and the impact of that experience on their careers through a halo effect.
The effect on the course team in terms of their personal development as a consequence of participation in the programme has been very positive. The opportunity afforded to learn at first hand some of the challenges extant in a range of public, private and voluntary management settings, each generating their own individual problems, enrich the teaching and learning as well as the research experience for the team. Opportunities arise for staff to test out their own research ideas with groups who are willing, and increasingly able, to critique effectively. Couple this with the stimulation of developing and managing teaching and learning strategies for a community of motivated people who are not afraid of challenging each other, as well as the course team.
This paper poses the question as to whether the Edge Hill MSc management development course is merely a programme in management or whether it is indeed a management development process. The paper opened with a discussion on the nature of management development and proposed the view that management development is a holistic learning and developmental process approach through time, in which the development of deeper levels of learning for participants is a key factor. The paper then describes the Edge Hill programme philosophy and learning process as well as the curriculum and moves on to a sample of extracts from a survey of course members.
Their contributions clearly indicate that the MSc management development process facilitates the development of learning communities that actively comprise course members as well as members of the course team. Finally, we must turn to the key members of this developing learning community, the course members themselves. Perhaps the Edge Hill philosophy in this respect reflects that of Mumford, in which he describes the benefits of continuous learning for individual as well as organisational development and change:
If we provide individuals with a greater capacity to learn from the widest possible variety of opportunities, we are empowering that individual to be in greater command of his or her own personal destiny (Mumford, 1994, p. 86). In this context, West (1994, p. 33) draws on Maslow and Argyris and poses the question as to whether self-actualisation can indeed be fulfilled and argues that if fulfilment is a possibility:
... there are considerable benefits in terms of development and receptivity to change, not only for the individual but also for the work group and the organization itself.
The authors see clearly that there is a degree of resonance in both Mumford's view on this matter as well as those indicated by West, with the imperatives and the philosophy of the Edge Hill programme.
Conclusion
The paper originally set out to explore the Edge Hill MSc management development programme and then some of the outcomes. A number of the distinguishing features of the learning and teaching processes were explored, as well as some reactions from past and present course members. We are left, however, with the tantalising question as to whether the MSc management development is a programme or a management development process? Perhaps it, not for the authors of this paper to make a judgement as they are clearly too close to the programme to be totally objective. It may be that the reader, as well as past and present course members (as they reflect upon the progression of their careers), would be better placed to reach a verdict?
References
Argyris, C. (1997), "Double loop learning in organizations", Harvard Business Review, September-October, pp. 115-25.
Choueke, R., McCarthy, M., Hayes, and Aslam, S. (1994), "Virtuality and gaming: the realization of a paradox", in Armstrong, R., Percival, F. and Saunders, D., The Simulation and Gaming Year Book, Volume 2, Kogan Page, London, pp. 37-47.
Choueke, R.W.E. and Armstrong, RX (1992),
"Management development for the entrepreneur", paper presented at the 16th Small Business Policy and Research Conference.
Caravan, T.N. (1997), "Training, development, education and learning: different or the same?", Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 21 No. 2-3,
pp. 39-51.
Gentle, P. (2001), "Course cultures and learning organizations", Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 2 No. 1, Pp. 8-30.
Mazen, A.M., Jones, M.C. and Sergenian, G.K. (2000), "Transfroming the class into a learning organization", Management Learning, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 147-61.
Mumford, A. (1994), "Individual and organizational learning: the pursuit of change", in Mabey and lies (Eds), Managing Learning, Routledge, London.
Pedler, M. (Ed.) (1991), Action Learning in Practice, Gower, Aldershot.
Raelin, J.A. (2000), "The new frontier of management development", Work Based Learning, Addison Wesley, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Raelin, J.A. (2001), "Public reflection and the basis of learning", Management Learning, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 11-29.
Revans, R. (1982), Origins and Growth of Action Learning, Chartwell Bratt, Bromley.
Rogers, C. (1996), On Personal Power, Constable, London Schein, E.H. (1996), "Three cultures of management: the key to organizational learning", Sloan Management Review, Fall.
Smith, P.C.A. (2001), "Action learning and reflective practice in project environments that are related to leadership development", Management Learning, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 31-48.
Thompson, A., Mabey, C., Storey, J., Gray. C. and Iles, P. (2001), Changing Patterns of Management Development Blackwell Business, Oxford.
West, P. (1994), "The learning organization: losing the luggage in transit", European Industrial Training, Vol. 18 No. 11, pp. 30-38.
West, P. and Burnes, B. (2000), "Applying organizational learning: lessons from automotive industry", International Journal of Operations & Production Management Vol. 20 No. 10, pp. 1236-51.
Further reading
Burke, R.J. and Cooper, C.L. (2000), The Organization in Crisis, Blackwell, Oxford and Malden, MA.
Burgoyne, J. and Reynolds, M. (1997), Management Learning Integrating Perspectives in Theory and Practice, Sage, London.
McGill, I. and Beaty, L. (1995), Action Learning in Practice, Kogan Page, London.
Poell, R.F. Chivers, G.E. Van der Krogt, F.J. and Wildemeerch, D.A. (2000), "Learning network theory organizing the dynamic relationships between learning and work", Management Learning, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 25-49.
West, P. (2000), Organisational Learning in the Automotive Industry, Routledge, London.
Richard Choueke and Penny West
The authors
Richard Choueke is Head of Department of Business Management and Leisure, and Penny West is Coordinator for full-time undergraduate programmes, both at the North West Centre for Business and Management at Edge Hill, Ormskirk, UK.
Appendix. Sample of responses from the questionnaire survey
(1) What were your original objectives for participating in the MSc Management Development programme?
-To get a theoretical understanding of issues relating to managing change
whilst learning from the experiences of others and getting a qualification at the end. In particular, looking at a range of sectors - private, public, voluntary etc, to see how my practical experience relates to theoretical concepts.
-A desire to advance my education and to further develop my managerial skills.
-Develop my management skills.
-Learn how to understand, motivate and encourage my colleagues and subordinates to provide a more efficient service.
-Develop my understanding of management techniques and models and hopefully apply them.
-To meet other managers from different organisations.
-To develop myself.
-To gain a broader perspective of organisational life.
-To be a better manager.
-To develop my academic skills and to
broaden my understanding of Management Development outside my public sector experience.
(2) Were they met?
- Yes: 33.
- No: 2.
- Yes and No: 1.
(2a) If yes, how?
The course offered valuable opportunities to explore developments in management e.g. theory around the learning organization, and reflect its evolution in one's organisation. The opportunities for discussion with other course members was also valuable in gaining insight into the individuality of organisations, why what may work in one does not work in others, and the ability to share good practice and bounce ideas off each other in a non-threatening open environment.
-I can relate my experiences to theoretical concepts and use reflection and a belief that there is "no one best way" in most situations. I have learnt from my colleagues as well as the staff and hopefully I will get a qualification at the end.
-I am a different person in work, I reflect and analyse a lot more, the new opened up to me and have allowed a different perspective in problem solving to emerge.
-Very difficult to quantify, but it's a combination of the tutor's knowledge, the learning environment and the course delegates.
(3) Has your approach to managing changed since you started the programme?
Yes: 31.
No: 3.
Not answered: 3.
(4) Please elaborate an your answer to the above question.
-Approach hasn't changed - but I bring better knowledge to management decisions now.
-A more organised approach, acknowledging the various facets and forms of change can allow a better, planned approach to structure change and develop contingency. The confidence to face and utilise change, especially the unexpected, random and unplanned.
-I think much of the content of the course both elaborated upon and gave confidence to the basic ideas I had in relation to management. The fact that subjects studied were taught in a very objective manner also gave this view a personal credibility
-I am more confident in my own abilities to manage change and more importantly reflect on a regular basis on successes and failures, hoping to improve things/decisions/actions in the future when similar circumstances arise. I am also more positive in putting ideas forward and involving other members of my team in the process.
-I now approach any management decision with the objective that there is no one right way and tend to pause and reflect. Previously I would have taken what was considered as a "cavalier" attitude.
-I can now apply the theoretical principles in my own organisation. My view and understanding of how to steer our organisation through changes has greatly benefited - I now realise the importance of motivating
individuals, acting as an efficient team and setting an example are critical to successful company changes. The importance of the different models, no one model is best, I would pick the most appropriate models and use the most suitable parts of each to my particular circumstances.
-Due to the broadening of my knowledge (which is an ongoing process) I appreciate different views more and draw upon wider experiences when making decisions. I have become more aware of my own management style in terms of strengths and weaknesses. I have learnt to apply new approaches such as reflective learning. I am also more confident within situations that arise throughout my workplace.
-I have had a tendency to be analytical, but I am more analytical and I understand more about what, why and how I am analysing. I am more comfortable with difference and diversity and I understand where, how and why management decisions have been made. I am less quick to make decisions, I have always tried to involve and develop people but in a more traditional mentoring, coaching way. I am also interested in how people learn.
-I have used all the principles of strategy effectively and I'm pleased I now have the skills to deal with all the negatives of change and change them into positives and they've helped me cope. I've managed change effectively against a lot of negative forces. I have become a more effective manager.
(5) Considering your original objectives, what for you have been the most positive aspects of the programme?
-The ability to have a wider, more critical view because of the interaction of course members - the wide mix of organisational backgrounds was of great benefit. The method of teaching which enabled the emphasis to learn discussion, questioning and analysis rather than the delivery of theory. This was aided by the openness of the teaching team.
-Besides the obvious addition to my knowledge of management theory etc., it was the fact things, e.g. the fact that the way I perceived the course was not as rigid as such in its application and structure, and that feeling of being guided and supported, rather than a more prescriptive method and style being adapted by our tutors has proved invaluable to me in how I now approach my way of thinking. I think I am more creative in the way I think and less inclined to follow my existing thoughts.
-Personal confidence in all aspects of management, I now feel more confident to deal with situations. Giving me self-belief in my knowledge/ability and learning from the experience of others. Also not looking at issues in complete isolation - change is influenced by and affects many other issues.
-It would be unfair to single out any particular aspect. The programme should be considered in a holistic manner.
-The "action learning" groups for our group session work. The application in our assignment tasks relating to my own organisation.
-The reflective management (module) was so different it really changed my outlook. The accessibility of the course has removed some of the traditional concerns over academic courses.
-Reflective management practitioner (module) gave me the tools to review my career on a personal level and to pursue further advancement in a structured yet flexible way.
-Mixed group. Good support from peers. Learning set really worked. Everything contained in the programme so far has met my expectations.
-I can't wait to start the final year!
(6) Considering your original objectives, what have been for you the least positive aspects of the programme?
-It was a general management programme - therefore have to try to translate issue into my work context. This was not always successful or possible.
-Professional development expectations of my current employer to value something they don't really understand or care about! My own drive to change this or move on are lacking, but in hand.
-Considering negative feedback is the most valuable, I am sorry to say that I can't think of anything that didn't fit in with my original objectives.
-Completing and finding the time for the written assignments have been the least positive aspect of the course. Lack of focus on all but private and multinational organisations in many case studies.
(7) What might we need to consider adding to the programme to make it more effective?
-The value of this programme appears to depend on developing a cohesive group of students quickly. I feel that the group was initially slow to "gel" and perhaps an initial residential weekend may help that process happen so that learning can start immediately.
-Rather than adding to the programme I would stress the holistic nature of the course so that students can free themselves to promote originality, fluidity and creativity.
-Can I add that I am particularly impressed with the standard of teaching from a dedicated team of specialists? Group cohesion has been excellent and it became apparent early in the programme that you would get out of the MSc what you put in. I will miss the Thursday sessions next year.
-The interactive modules from tutor "A" were very good. The discussion groups from tutor "B" and "C" were a real eye opener, tutor "D's" interactive banter was stimulating, tutor "E's" notes were very good and tutor "F's" grass roots approach refreshing.
Copyright MCB UP Limited (MCB) 2002