Program committees have many opportunities to engage in analysis and modernization of their programs through the Institutional Quality Assurance Framework (IQAP) or the voluntary engagement with the Curriculum Delivery Initiative (CDI). The CDI steering committee created a framework of guiding principles for consideration that align with the elements of the Academic Plan regarding programs. Within each of the Academic Plan priority areas there are several program-level and curricula-based actions, such as:

• Revise courses and programs to provide greater flexibility, including through reviewing program pathways, core and context credits, combined major requirements, course sequencing, and reconsidering course durations (e.g. split F courses into P courses).
• Focus efforts on curriculum review and program reimagination to allow for a well-designed mix of on-campus, online, and blended course options, as determined by the alignment between course delivery mode and learning outcomes.
• Provide students with greater choice and flexibility when constructing their timetables to support the integration of academic and co-curricular achievement with work and life responsibilities.
• Review and modernize Brock’s core and context credits system to prioritize breadth and maximize opportunities for student exposure to themes in equity, diversity, inclusion, social justice, sustainability, and global justice.
• Ensure the appropriate foundations of a discipline or field are incorporated into programs to allow for the scaffolding or creative and innovative thinking.

• Program learning outcomes are shared with students; connections between each course and program goals are explicit.
• Courses within a program share a common set of high expectations that are articulated on a course outline that is shared through the learning management system.
• Assessments across the program vary and demonstrate constructive alignment between course learning outcomes, assessment, and program learning outcomes.

• Taught by full-time faculty skilled and dedicated to teaching.
• Include opportunities for small group learning.
• Focus on explicit academic skill-focused activities/assessments – both general skills and those tailored to the discipline (e.g. specific writing conventions, formats).
• Reduce required first year courses to allow for maximal flexibility to move between programs within Faculty or institution.

• Deliberate, swift, and actionable attention to courses where students frequently and consistently receive grades of D or F or have high volumes of Drop/Withdrawal rates (DFW), particularly large year 1 or 2 courses.
• Integrated academic advising (following both proactive and reactive models) and mentorship (both faculty and peer-models) informed by a student’s transcript and course progress.

Many of the following strategies build upon many years of pedagogical research into High Impact Practices (Kuh, 2008) that have proven to increase student engagement, motivation, learning and overall support student success. Instructors have many design, delivery, and assessment decisions that can greatly impact the quality of the student learning experience. Changes to Brock Policies on evaluation and examinations in the Academic Regulations of the Faculty Handbook in 2024 were implemented to support these leading pedagogical strategies.

Flexible and diverse approaches to assess learning

• Follow Brock policy in FHB III. 10.1.2 Evaluation:
  • Peer evaluation cannot count for more than 25 percent of the final grade.
  • A single item cannot count for more than 50 percent of the final grade.
  • Shall reflect grades from no fewer than 3 assessments.

Allow multiple modes of expression for students to demonstrate their learning as per the Universal Design for Learning framework (CAST, 2024):

• For e.g., provide assignments beyond the standard written paper or exam like podcasts, videos, mindmaps, infographics, board games (McMaster et al, 2021)

Provide opportunities for formative and summative feedback.

Implement proactive accessible pedagogical design (Parsons et al, 2021):

• Create welcoming and accessible physical and digital spaces.
• Chunk content in lectures; allow breaks:
  • For e.g., organize learning materials in 20minute segments based on logical topics and provide opportunities for learners to share ideas with each other and the instructor.
  • At least every 1-1.5h provide a stretch and biology break to allow students sufficient time to refocus.
• Multiple means of representation (incorporate visuals, text, videos, where appropriate).

Accommodations

• Consult CPI’s Senior Educational Developer, Accessibility and Inclusion and SAS Case managers to support students with disabilities, including, but not limited to:
  1. Allow note-taking practices like Glean and student notetaker support.
  2. Allow students who require accommodations to use memory aids during exams.
  3. Allow extra time on tests.

• Building a sense of community, sense of belonging, acknowledging diversity in student population (Kuh, 2008).
• Culturally responsive teaching practices.
• Mentorship.

Authentic assessments (Openo, 2025) and open pedagogy (DeRosa & Jhangiani) can support student success by increasing motivation through relevance and meaning. These assessment methods can also enhance a culture of academic integrity by creating opportunities for higher level critical analyses connected to community and career (Kuh, 2008).

• Learning outside the classroom e.g., leadership programs, to build strong campus community, yet provide opportunities for skill-building, leadership development and personal growth (Kuh, 2008).
• Connect with colleagues in Career, Co-op, and Experiential Education and Student Life and Success.

• Thoughtful mix of online, blended, and in person to provide access to a diverse student population (e.g., adult learners, students with disabilities, students juggling work and family obligations, among others).
• Course design that allows for delays and interruptions in attendance and assignment submission without hindering progress. Designing with flexibility acknowledges that students are entitled to use the Student Absence Declaration Form once per term per course.

• Critical acknowledgement of the affordances and disadvantages of generative AI.
• Intentional use of collaborative tools for learning engagement:
  • For e.g., only enable tools in the LMS that will be used in the course: discussions have a purpose and the rationale for their use is explicit. The quiz and assignment tools are only enabled if students will have assessments available in these areas.
• Automate and integrate support structures.
• Cross functional Learning Analytics, directed by the instructor.
• Potential integrative supports, in partnership with the Office of the Registrar:
  • Proactive Support for Lower Academic Achievement:
    • Based on instructor-identified grades, students achieving low grades across multiple courses could receive supportive, appreciative outreach from the centralized academic advising team and would be supported in connecting with campus resources specific to what they may individually require strengthening their studies.
• Instructor presence/relational approaches:
  • Explore implementation of a Brightspace Intelligence Agent and creation of messaging templates for faculty members and/or the Office of the Registrar & Enrolment Services to implement, for e.g., students who have low or no engagement in the LMS or are receiving concerning lower grades as identified by the instructor.
• Transfer Student Academic Outreach:
  • A notification button allows students to alert the Transfer Academic Advisor as to their wishes to discuss their academic progress and be supported in connecting with campus resources specific to what they may individually require to strengthen their studies.

• Use a course outline, reviewing the Brock template for updates to institutional policy around course delivery and assessment.
• Share expectations around student conduct, instructor response times
• Evenly distribute workload and follow scheduling patterns.
• Share specific departmental grading practices and course policies, and ensure they are in alignment with the Faculty Handbook Instructor Responsibilities.

Tuition, food, and housing costs can negatively impact students’ ability to persist in post-secondary education (Hansen & Lopez, 2025). While these issues are out of scope for pedagogical practices, instructors could increase student affordability by replacing commercial textbooks through adoption of Open Educational Resources (OER).

• In a large-scale study of 21,822 students, the adoption of OER improves end-of-course grades and decreases DFW (D, F, and Withdrawal letter grades) rates for all students. They also improve course grades at greater rates and decrease DFW rates for populations historically underserved by higher education. OER address affordability, completion, attainment gap concerns, and learning (Colvard et al, 2018).
• In a cross Canada study, when asked about how the cost of textbooks had influenced their course enrolment and persistence, 27% of respondents indicated that they had taken fewer courses, 26% had not registered for a course, and 17% reported dropping or withdrawing from a course, all at least once (Jhangiani et al, 2017).
• At Brock, students have reported costs of textbooks have affected their course load selection and success (Jhangiani et al, 2025).

CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. Retrieved from https://udlguidelines.cast.org

Colvard, N. B., Watson, C. E., & Park, H. (2018). The Impact of Open Educational Resources on Various Student Success Metrics. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 30(2), 262–276.

DeRosa, R., & Jhangiani, R. (n.d.). Open Pedagogy. http://openpedagogy.org/open-pedagogy/.Hansen, J., & Lopez, J. (2025).

Student Hunger: How We Got Here and Solutions to Increase Persistence. New Directions for Community Colleges. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20659

Kuh, G. D. (2008). High-Impact educational practices. Peer Review, 10(4), 30.

Jhangiani, R., Pakkal, O., Morrison, L., and Rong, W. (2025). 2024 Student Course Materials Survey. Brock University. https://inclusiveeducationlab.com/2024-student-course-materials-survey/

Jhangiani, R. S., & Jhangiani, S. (2017). Investigating the Perceptions, Use, and Impact of Open Textbooks: A survey of Post-Secondary Students in British Columbia. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(4). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i4.3012

Openo, J. (2024). Academic Integrity and the Affordances and Limitations of Authentic Assessment. In S. E. Eaton (Ed.), Second Handbook of Academic Integrity (pp. 217–231). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54144-5_90

McMaster University, Brock University & Boreal College (2022). Beyond the Exam. eCampusOntario. https://www.beyondtheexam.ca/

Parsons, J., McColl, M. A., Martin, A. K., & Rynard, D. W. (2021). Accommodations and academic performance: First-year university students with disabilities. Canadian Journal of Higher Education / Revue Canadienne d’enseignement Supérieur, 51(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.vi0.188985

Pechenkina, E., Laurence, D., Oates, G., Eldridge, D., and Hunter, D. (2017). Using a gamified mobile app to increase student engagement, retention and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14 (31), 1-12

Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college : rethinking institutional action. The University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (2025). Student Persistence Through a Different Lens*. Journal of College Student Retention, 26(4), 959–969. https://doi.org/10.1177/15210251241249158

White, H. C., Ruskin, K. J., Jolley, A., Flint, N., Allen, D. M., Pelletreau, K. N., Olsen, B. J., Ferrini-Mundy, J. E., & Volin, J. C. (2025). Research Learning Experiences for First-Year Undergraduate Students: Belonging, Research Identity, and Retention. Research in Higher Education, 66(3), 17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-025-09836-8