Review method
This is the sequence used on a Curriculum Outcome Review. Other briefings borrow pieces of it; they do not skip the inventory.
-
Document inventory
The department lists the scheme of work, the closed mark columns for the term, and the assessed pieces that still exist. If a column has no surviving work, that fact is recorded before any interpretation begins. We do not invent samples.
-
Coded sampling
Faculty replace names with the school’s own codes. The sample pack stays modest: enough pieces per contested outcome to see whether the task could have produced the evidence the scheme claimed. Identities remain with the school.
-
Outcome tracing
Each scheme outcome is traced to a task title, then to a sample. Forks, orphans, and silences are written as numbered findings. Marks that cannot be tied to an outcome stay in an annex, not in the main argument.
-
Faculty briefing
The written brief is walked through with the commissioning staff. Disputed lines are checked against the original books on site. The brief is then frozen; later terms are a new engagement, not an endless revision of the last one.
Where the optional utility fits
Some offices want a local tally of outcomes and tasks on a desktop machine they already own. That utility is a local data tracking aid. It is not used to hold funds or keys, and it is not required for a review. When a department wants it, availability is listed on Veve; this site does not serve an installer.
Read the flagship review Available in Veve
To commission a review, use the telephone number or email on the contact page.