| Option | Description | Pros | Cons | Comments |
|---|
| 1 | Top slice courses, subjects and programmes. Once complete commence on faculty and school sites. | - Adheres to initial view of completing centralised repositories first
- Optimised for the goal of "supporting recruitment benefits by our 1 October deadline"
- Delivers some benefits to all faculties this year
| - Delays work on the faculty and school sites
| |
| 2 | Top slice courses and subjects. Programmes done with faculty and school sites. | - Adheres to initial view of completing centralised repositories first
- Move onto F&S sites earlier as programmes are addressed in this development
| - Recruitment process will bounce all future students to an old style programme page
| |
| 3 | One faculty at a time, with their CSP first. | - Each faculty and school site is completed and released as a whole
- Still addresses CSP first, but focuses on priority faculties upfront
| - Slows engagement across faculties
- Increased duplication of course outlines, as COO runs ahead of WIP II.
| |
| 4 | Two parallel work streams. CSP in one, and F&S sites in another. | - Allows progress on F&S sites and CSP in parallel
- Improves engagement across all faculties, as will work with them sooner on CSP
- Enables more flexible resource mapping (specialists to priority task)
| - Any specific faculty will be slower due to prioritising CSP
| |
