One of the advantages of this kind of blog is that it is located in a kind of liminal no-man's land which is not quite 'official' and therefore allows a bit of speculative thinking which might not be so appropriate in an official forum. So here are some thoughts that come from nowhere except my speculative hunches about where the institution is likely to be heading. As we know, there is a cross university working group currently examining programme structures and the curriculum. My guess is that when it eventually reports, it will suggest a radical overhaul of the existing frameworks.
Several things may happen. Firstly, I reckon the 30 credit double module will become standard currency. Would that allow us to offer "double double" 60 credit modules in some instances? Secondly, I reckon there will be a strong push to reduce the number of combined permutations currently offered as 'pick and mix'. We may well be asked to identify specified combinations which in effect are treated as single honours degrees (eg. English and Media Studies, Journalism and Film Studies, etc.) with a clear rationale and sense of programme identity. And thirdly, we may well be encouraged to use this 'opportunity' to make adjustments to assessment in order to free up more staff time for other things such as research. Fourthly, we might see 'de-semesterisation' coming along and a return to the traditional 3 term year which is where I started in 1852.
So three distinct developments may mesh together to produce a rather new environment with some potential dangers but also perhaps some good opportunities. Over-assessment is a problem across the sector and if we avoided the temptation to double up assessments as we switch to 30 credit modules we might really save some more time for other staff activities such as research. Big double modules running through the academic year might encourage students to actually read for their disciplilne rather than just for assessments? But, on the other hand, all this was introduced at my old university back in the early 2000s and the dismantling of the combined pick and mix structure triggered a series of programme closures because certain programmes depended very heavily upon recruiting small numbers of students across a very wide range of permutations.
It might be an idea for programme teams to begin to think about what they would like their programmes to look like in a new 30 credit regime. And would you want to lighten the assessment loads to free up staff time?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Firstly, Paul, could you please change the time zone in customise/settings/formatting so that I don't think that you come up with all your brilliance first thing in the morning?
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure why bigger modules will encourage students to read. My cynical view is that they are becoming more and more inclined to work only towards assessment and, while I believe we should be reducing the assessment load, I don' see how we can encourage them towards a less strategic way of learning without it. Perhaps lots of small gateways?
Any idea how any of this would be introduced? Would everyone have to revalidate at once? Bigger modules would certainly close down many CH options.
I think fewer, bigger modules are better. We certainly need a Departmental (perhaps faculty) lecture and seminar programme on the theory side. This would give the department an academic life as well as a mainly administrative one. Such a common aprroach might be lumpy, but it would have to be built from whatever everyone could bring to the party. We have a coherent Arts type theory prog of the sort you would see in any uni now in journalism, so that might be a starting point. People could add things, taken things away. The course is on youtube (and shortly to be moved to the new journalism subdomain). I blogged it previously, but nobody has responded yet.
ReplyDelete