the 20-credit handbook - staff intranet

The 20-Credit Handbook

A Guide to Module, Programme and Award Design

for the New 20-Credit Structure

May 2007

The University is committed to… promoting creativity, innovation and flexibility in terms of how teaching and

learning is designed, delivered, supported and assessed.

(Napier University’s Strategy for Learning, Teaching and Assessment, 2005)

The 20-Credit Handbook

A Guide to Module, Programme and Award Design

for the New 20-Credit Structure

May 2007

All URLs in this Handbook last accessed May 2007 Published by Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland © 2007. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without permission in writing from Napier University, 219 Colinton Road, Edinburgh EH14 1DJ, Scotland.

ii

Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................1 Section I: The design specifications for modules, programmes and awards .......................................................................................................3 Credit requirements for awards 3 The credit structure for programmes 4 Regulations governing the use of non-standard modules (undergraduate) 5 Defining modules: Compulsory, Core and Option 6 Defining the programme option pool 6 Location of opportunities for option-taking 7 Patterns of study for part-time students 7 Design rules for postgraduate taught programmes 8 Note on programmes delivered in partnership 8 Section II: The academic and pedagogical implications of the 20-credit structure..........................................................................................11 Part 1: Learning and teaching: the University context for the introduction of 20-credit modules......................................................................................... 12

Learning, Teaching and Assessment at Napier University 12 Aims of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy 12 Being learning focused 13 Rethinking your role as tutor 14 Enhancing, extending, empowering for learner autonomy 14

Part 2: Implications of the move for programme and module design ............... 15

Broad issues 15 Option modules 16 Week 1 17 Week 13 18 Weeks 14 and 15 (Level 7/Year 1, Trimester 1) 18 Assessment 18 Assessment quantity benchmarks 19 Non-standard modules 21 Other general issues in module development 21

iii

Section III: The approval process for modules and programmes ..............27 Phase 1: The establishment of a School culture for provision in the 20-credit modular structure 27 Phase 2: The approval of modules 28 Phase 3: The approval of programmes 29 Module Descriptor and Programme Validation Databases 30 Academic regulations in the revised modular structure 31 Section IV: An outline of the required systems and process changes......33 SITS:Vision (NIMROD) student record system changes 33 Syllabus Plus timetabling system changes 34 New coding conventions 35 Appendix I: Programme Design Templates..................................................37 Appendix II: References and further resources ...........................................43

iv

The 20-Credit Handbook Introduction

Introduction 1 This Handbook is based on the principles agreed by Academic Board at its

meeting in February 2007 when it considered the recommendations of a working group on the revision of the University’s modular structure. Hence, those principles serve as an overall introduction to this guide and to the University’s adoption of a curriculum structure based on a standard 20-credit module:

a) the adoption of the revised structure based on the 20-credit module to

be implemented in September 2008; b) the 20-credit module as the foundation of the University academic

delivery structures and the accepted norm for programme development;

c) in the case of postgraduate taught programmes, the 20-credit module

recognised as standard, but programmes allowed to include both 10-credit modules and multiples of 20 credits (up to 60 credits);

d) in the case of credit-bearing CPD, no regulatory approach to design

and the assignment of credit, but provision to match the demands and needs of particular markets;

e) the principle that all undergraduate students should be able to exercise

an element of choice in the construction of their academic programmes;

f) every undergraduate programme to be designed as a balance

between compulsory/core modules and option modules, and the design principles which set the balance between these for any particular programme to take into account the nature of the academic discipline or disciplines involved, and the requirements of professional bodies;

g) students to be entitled to fulfil the given part of their programmes

represented by option modules by choosing from a pool of modules created for each specific programme of study;

h) the principle of student choice also to inform taught postgraduate

programmes but the amount of choice to be a matter for each individual programme or suite of programmes;

i) a student to be allowed to progress whilst carrying failure to a

maximum of 20 credits; j) students not to be assessed by formal, time-constrained, closed

examination at the end of the first trimester of the first level (SCQF Level 7).

Napier University, Edinburgh 1

Introduction The 20-Credit Handbook

2 Napier University, Edinburgh

2 This Handbook contains four sections:

I: The design specifications for modules, programmes and awards II: The academic and pedagogical implications of the 20-credit structure III: The approval process for modules and programmes IV: An outline of the required systems and process changes.

3 At the end of each of these sections, you will find details of who to contact should you require further information, advice or support.

4 The University will also introduce a revised structure for its academic year in September 2008. Some parts of this structure will influence the re-development and design of modules and programmes. You are also invited, in this context, to consider the implications of the new structure: the relevant Academic Board paper can be found in the Academic Board section of the Intranet.1 At appropriate points in this Handbook, more detailed reference is made to specific features of the revised academic year which have a particular impact on programme and module design, for example, the new arrangements for Week 1 of each trimester.

5 The adoption of a revised modular structure as well as a revised academic

year represents a significant programme of change for the University, and a substantial workload for its staff. Achieving this for September 2008 will rely on the sustained commitment of staff to the design and development of the modules and programmes for which they have responsibility. The front cover of this guide deliberately includes a quotation from the University’s Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy: it is the implementation of the vision articulated – and the commitments made – in that strategy which is the impetus for change. Whilst there is much work to be done, the outcomes should result in an enhanced, richer and more flexible academic experience for students. The changes to both the academic year and the modules and programmes within it represent a unique opportunity for staff to build on the extensive good practice which exists in the University and to exercise creativity and innovation for the benefit of our students. Dr Peter Easy Vice-Principal (Academic Development)

1 staff.napier.ac.uk/Services/Secretariat/Committees/Academic+Board.htm

http://staff.napier.ac.uk/Services/Secretariat/Committees/Academic+Board.htm

The 20-Credit Handbook Section I

Section I: The design specifications for modules, programmes and awards Credit requirements for awards 1 The University’s current regulations for awards will be subject to some

minor revisions to take account of the new 20-credit structure. Undergraduate taught provision 2 The following award requirements will apply:

A Certificate or a Certificate of Higher Education will be awarded to a student who has satisfied all programme specific requirements and gained a minimum of 120 credits at SCQF Level 7 or above. A Diploma or Diploma of Higher Education will be awarded to a student who has satisfied all programme specific requirements and gained a minimum of 240 credits of which a minimum of 100 credits are from modules at SCQF Level 8 or above. A Degree will be awarded to a student who has satisfied all programme specific requirements and gained a minimum of 360 credits of which:

a) a minimum of 60 credits are from modules at SCQF Level 9 or above,

and; b) a minimum of 100 credits are from modules at SCQF Level 8 or above.

A Degree with Honours will be awarded to a student who has satisfied all programme specific requirements and gained a minimum of 480 credits of which:

a) a minimum of 100 credits are from modules at SCQF Level 10, of

which a minimum of 40 credits are derived from a dissertation or final year project, and;

b) a minimum of 80 credits are from modules at SCQF Level 9 or above,

and; c) a minimum of 120 credits are from modules at SCQF Level 8 or above.

Taught Masters provision 3 The following regulations will apply:

A Postgraduate Certificate will be awarded to a student who has gained a minimum of 60 credits at SCQF Level 11.


Section I The 20-Credit Handbook

A Postgraduate Diploma will be awarded to a student who has gained a minimum of 120 credits at SCQF Level 11. A Masters Degree will be awarded to a student who has gained a minimum of 180 credits at SCQF Level 11, of which at least 40 credits at SCQF Level 11 must be derived from a dissertation module or equivalent.

The credit structure for programmes 4 The key principle for the design of programmes is that they are a

combination of compulsory/core modules and option modules. The definitions of these terms – Compulsory, Core and Option – are given in paragraph 12 below. It is for programme designers to decide on what the balance of compulsory/core and option modules should be within the minimum and maximum limits indicated for each type of programme in the table below.

Programme type (Honours)

Minimum Compulsory/Core credit needed

Maximum Compulsory/Core credit allowed

Single subject 300 440

Major/Minor Major: 240 Minor: 100

Major: 300 Minor: 140

Joint For each subject: 160 For each subject: 220

Customised Programmes Negotiated Negotiated

5 For any student programme (other than customised) this means that:

a) the minimum credit decided by the student through the exercise of free

choice from the programme option pool (see paragraphs 13–17 below) will be 40 credits (equivalent to two standard 20-credit modules). This will be the case for a single subject honours programme where the programme designers use the maximum permitted compulsory/core of 440 credits;

b) the maximum credit decided by the student through the exercise of

choice from the programme option pool will range from 140 credits to 180 credits (equivalent to between seven and nine standard 20-credit modules) depending on the programme type and use of compulsory/core credit by the individual programme.



6 Programme designers are encouraged not to assume the use of the maximum compulsory/core credit permitted for a programme (unless there are clear imperatives to do so).

7 In the case of customised programmes, module selection will be governed

by the regulations within the Customised Programmes Framework which will be updated to take account of the new structure. Effectively, there will be no compulsory or core modules for such students and they will be able to draw upon the entire University module catalogue. Actual module selection will be negotiated with Faculty staff or with the staff of the Centre for Customised Programmes as appropriate.

8 Some examples of programme designs and other templates are provided

in Appendix I to this Handbook. Regulations governing the use of non-standard modules (undergraduate) 9 The principle approved by Academic Board is that the 20-credit module

should become the standard for the University. However, the use of non-standard modules may be considered by programme developers as follows:

a) multiples of 20 credits are permitted for dissertations, project modules

and similar work normally to a maximum of 40 credits. It is anticipated that the use of these modules will be limited to Stages 3 and 4 (SCQF Levels 9 and 10) and a case will need to be made at approval for use at any other stage. In cases where a programme wishes to include a dissertation, project or similar module to a value above 40 credits, a case will need to be made at the approval stage;

b) multiples of 20 credits are also permitted for work-based learning, work

placements etc. The credit value of such modules is expected to resemble current practice but with an appropriate adjustment for the 20-credit base structure;

c) 10-credit modules may only be used if there are external imperatives

(for example, professional body requirements). At least two such modules must be offered concurrently. A case will need to be made at the approval stage;

d) ‘long thin’ 20-credit modules (that is, 20-credit modules delivered over

two trimesters) may only be used if there are external imperatives (for example, professional body requirements). At least two such modules must be offered concurrently. A case will need to be made at the approval stage.



10 In all cases where a non-standard module is being considered, the programme designers are asked to consult with the appropriate Associate Dean and seek advice on the probability of the module being approved. This ‘pre-approval’ stage is important: it is designed to prevent any difficulties arising at a much later stage in the approval process.

11 In considering any use of non-standard modules which are smaller than

the 20-credit norm, programme designers should take into account the Academic Board stipulation that students, in fulfilling the norm of studying for 60 credits in a trimester, may only take up to a maximum of four modules.

Defining modules: Compulsory, Core and Option 12 A new set of terms will be used to describe the status of undergraduate

modules in programmes:

Compulsory: a named individual module which is a compulsory part of a programme.

Core: (one of) a set of named modules compiled by the

programme from which the student must choose a designated number.

Option: a module placed in the programme-designed option pool

and which the student may choose in order to fulfil the credit allowance designated as optional in their programme.

Defining the programme option pool 13 Each programme will define an option pool related to the programme. 14 The option pool may contain:

a) other discipline-specific modules which are not otherwise compulsory

or core for the programme; b) modules from other disciplines which are individually identified by the

programme team as being acceptable option choices for the programme.

15 The option pool will contain:

c) a set of approved co-curricular modules which will become a part of

the option pool for every undergraduate programme in the University. The term ‘co-curricular’ is used to define modules which are not



discipline-specific and which reflect the broad aims and mission of the University in areas such as entrepreneurship, employability, student involvement, and other activities which increase the social capital of students. This set of modules is currently being developed by a working group of Academic Board (see also Section II, paragraph 18).

16 Students will also have the opportunity to choose, as part of their option

allowance, any other undergraduate module offered in the University provided that they meet any stated prerequisites, and that they have negotiated the choice with their Personal Development Tutor. It is anticipated that such a choice would normally be a module outwith the School, and probably the Faculty, in which the student’s main programme is located.

17 The programme option pool must be designated by the complete

programme rather than by separate components of a programme. Hence, where Joint components or Major and Minor components are being taken from different parts of a School, Faculty, or the University, the staff concerned will need to co-operate over the establishment of an acceptable option pool. It is expected that the option pools will be as open and flexible as possible.

Location of opportunities for option-taking 18 The location in a programme of opportunities for option-taking is at the

discretion of the designers of individual programmes except that, in all cases, there must be one 20-credit ‘space’ in Stage 1 of a student’s programme (that is, in the first year of study). In addition, and in cases where only the minimum opportunity for option-taking is provided (that is, 40 credits or two 20-credit modules) it is expected that the second option will be located in Stage 2 of the programme (that is, the second year of study).

Patterns of study for part-time students 19 Part-time students currently follow patterns of study determined by:

a) constructing their own programme using modules available to full-time

students at the rate of one to three modules per trimester; or b) the design of a specific named award.

20 In the revised structure, category a) provision will need to take into

account a sequencing of modules and student workload which reflects the new structure (given that no part-time student will now be able to take three 20-credit modules in a trimester). Specific change will be required for provision which falls into category b). In these cases, it is expected that



programme designers will translate their current provision from 15-credit modules to 20-credit modules and demonstrate that the revised programme:

a) meets the basic requirements for a University award; b) operates efficiently for students in respect of timing and subject

coverage; c) meets prerequisite requirements.

21 Part-time students on Customised Programmes will agree their individual

programme of study with the relevant Programme Advisor. Each student’s programme of study will be subject to approval within the University Customised Programme Framework which will be amended to take into account the revised University programme regulations.

Design rules for postgraduate taught programmes 22 The overall credit requirements for postgraduate taught awards will not

change, that is, the current pattern of 60 credits/120 credits/180 credits for Postgraduate Certificate/Postgraduate Diploma/Masters will remain.

23 In all other respects, the design rules for postgraduate taught programmes

are simply those which were agreed by Academic Board, that is:

In the case of postgraduate taught programmes the 20-credit module should also be recognised as standard, but programmes are permitted to include both 10-credit modules and multiples of 20 credits (up to 60 credits) as a matter of academic and professional discretion and expertise.

24 In respect of choice in postgraduate taught programmes, please note the

further agreement by Academic Board:

the principle of student choice should also inform taught postgraduate programmes but that the amount of choice should be a matter for each individual programme or suite of programmes (but that proposals which have no element of choice at all would be required to furnish a convincing rationale at the approval stage).

Note on programmes delivered in partnership 25 It is recognised that there may be particular issues related to re-designing

programmes which are delivered in partnership with other institutions. Such programmes will be required to move to the 20-credit structure but the timescale for this will be extended to September 2009 to allow for appropriate discussions with partners and for adequate notice to be given.



Programmes may, of course, be re-designed to the 20-credit structure prior to September 2009 at the discretion of the Faculty.

For additional support and advice in relation to this section of the Handbook, please contact: For general module and programme development advice: Keith Horton (ECCI) Morag Gray (HLSS) Arthur Morrison (NUBS) For further details on co-curricular modules: Morag Gray (HLSS) For further advice on credit requirements and structures/part-time programmes: Sam Allwinkle (Lifelong Learning) For general enquiries: Colin Bryce (Vice-Principal’s Office)


The 20-Credit Handbook Section II

Section II: The academic and pedagogical implications of the 20-credit structure 1 The move to a standard 20-credit module offers many benefits to the

University’s students. Taking six 20-credit modules per level rather than eight 15-credit modules will offer them the opportunity to study and develop their understanding in greater depth. In addition, there will be increased opportunities to learn collaboratively and become more skilled as independent learners. There should also be fewer assessments at each level with the accompanying potential for deeper learning and for improved retention. Students will also benefit from the changes to the structure of the academic year with the new Week I providing increased opportunities for broader preparation, social integration and orientation, and Week 13 providing potential for a variety of uses and not just preparation for assessment.

2 Ultimately, the move to 20-credit modules presents a unique opportunity to

build upon the wealth of existing good practice in how we teach and support our students, and to ensure our programme provision is robust and sensitive to the changing needs of contemporary higher education.

3 This section of the Handbook comprises two parts:

Part 1: Learning and teaching: the University context for the introduction of 20-credit modules

Part 2: Implications of the move for programme and module design.

4 Part 2 raises relevant issues arising from the move to 20-credit modules

for you to consider in designing programme and developing modules respectively. To enable you to follow up any of the issues raised in Part 2 in more depth, internal and external links and references are provided in the text or as footnotes. In addition, Appendix II of the Handbook contains a series of references to additional resources which you may find useful.


Section II The 20-Credit Handbook


Part 1: Learning and teaching: the University context for the introduction of 20-credit modules Learning, Teaching and Assessment at Napier University 5 The move to 20-credit modules provides an opportunity to fully embrace

and implement key elements of the University’s Strategy for Learning, Teaching and Assessment2. The strategy is forward-looking, and promotes a learning focus in keeping with our nature as a flexible and adaptable institution that is amongst the top ten modern universities in

3 the

UK .

6 ying philosophy of the strategy is encapsulated in the following definition:

nt

ce, a respect for

Lublin, J and Prosser, M as cited by Gibbs, G (1995)4

ims of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy

The stated aims of the strategy are:

a) at are valued by students, employers, the sector and

the community;

b) ty and partnership as

complementary and fundamental;

The underl

Good teaching is teaching which helps students to learn... It encourages high quality student learning. It discourages the superficial approach to learning and encourages activeengagement with the subject matter. This does not imply that good teaching always results in high quality studelearning, but that it is designed to do so and that it is practiced in a way likely to lead to high quality learning... good teaching is that which encourages in the learner, no matter what the subject content, motivation to learn, desire to understand, perseverance, independenthe truth and a desire to pursue learning.

A 7

to develop confident individuals with high quality achievements, skills and attributes th

to create inspiring, challenging and effective learning, by valuing teaching, research, scholarly activi

2 Promoting Learning for Achieving Potential: Napier University’s Strategy for Learning, Teaching and Assessment (2005) www.napier.ac.uk/ed/pdf/LTA_Final_2005_1.pdf 3 As judged in Leach, J (ed) (2007) Guardian University Guide: what to study, where to go, how to get there, Atlantic Books, LBS 4 Gibbs, G (1995) ‘How can promoting excellent teachers promote excellent learning’, Innovations in Education and Training International, 32 (1) p75

http://www.napier.ac.uk/ed/pdf/LTA_Final_2005_1.pdf


c) to strengthen Napier’s reputation for providing high quality learning that is student focused and flexible and that enhances students’ employability.

Being learning focused 8 The Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy articulates the

commitments that the University has made in order to ensure that the above aims are successfully met. As such, it is a fundamental document and provides a platform for an informed approach to the effective design and delivery of programmes and modules.

9 The following list summarises the pedagogical principles that will ensure

we remain truly learning focused, and are able to create stimulating learning experiences that allow our increasingly diverse range of learners to develop rich subject knowledge and wider employability skills. In the design or re-design of modules to 20-credits we should:

a) ensure that every learner is as active as possible. Start by thinking

about designing learning tasks that address the question: how can we challenge students to think more deeply about what it is they are learning?

b) design frequent formative assessment. Encourage the learner to

test their understanding or skills frequently and ensure that they get timely, constructive and useful feedback and guidance – this should include feedback from peers, where possible;

c) put emphasis on collaborative learning (building a learning

community). In your teaching, consider how you can create small groups which will work together to produce something – a report, a lesson, a demonstration. Consider how the groups can then teach other groups about their chosen topic. Try to engender a sense of ownership and achievement in your module;

d) consider how learning tasks can be personalised. Give the

individual student, or a small group, choice over exactly what is to be achieved and how best to achieve it. Negotiate with learners as much as possible. Aim for project-based, resource-based, discussion-based learning – not relying too heavily on direct instruction;

e) make appropriate use of technology to enhance classroom practice,

increase choice and flexibility in how, when and where to learn, and provide new or improved learning opportunities for campus-based, part-time and distance learners.




Rethinking your role as tutor 10 In thinking about how to embed these principles in your 20-credit modules,

it is important to note that the move from 15 to 20 credits should not necessarily imply a proportional increase in classroom-based activities. Module leaders and tutors should instead look towards playing more of a facilitating role in supporting individualised and collaborative learning.

11 Indeed, the move to 20-credit modules brings with it the opportunity and

space to place more emphasis on learners working together, and for you as the tutor to help foster the development of more autonomous learning. With due regard to the previous learning experiences and cultural backgrounds of our students, it is possible to take this further by embracing the move to 20-credit modules as a perfect opportunity more explicitly to design a gradual increase in student autonomy into the process of progression through SCQF Levels 7 to 11.

Enhancing, extending, empowering for learner autonomy 12 In tackling the ways in which you might support an increase in student

autonomy, it is possible to see learning opportunities as a continuum of enhanced through extended to empowered. Each level implies a different kind of role for the student to play:

a) at the enhanced level, the student is viewed as being more actively

involved in their learning experience and having a greater degree of responsibility for their learning than they may have previously been used to;

b) at the extended level the student is seen to become an engaged

learner – they move from an active to more of a pro-active position and are required to make at least some key decisions about the nature of the activities they are to undertake;

c) at the empowered level, the student is required to assume almost full

control of their independent and collaborative learning in a way that reflects the responsibility they will ultimately have in the professional environment.

13 Of course, in any module there may be a number of learning tasks and

activities working at each of these ‘levels’, while what is generally possible or desirable in terms of increased student autonomy for first year students may be quite different from final year students5.

5 For those staff not already involved in the TESEP project, you will find useful and interesting material on its website at extranet.lauder.ac.uk/tesep

http://extranet.lauder.ac.uk/tesep


Part 2: Implications of the move for programme and module design 14 In this part, we begin to consider operationalising the principles outlined in

Part 1 by highlighting key considerations which should be taken in account by programme and module designers. A series of general considerations are presented first. More detailed guidance is then given on some of the particular features of the revised modular structure and academic year.

Broad issues 15 Have you thought about:

a) offering your programme in different delivery modes, for example part-time, flexible, blended, as well as full-time?

b) the efficiency of the programme and the minimum and maximum

number of modules that are needed to deliver it? c) building in learning structures that encourage attendance and

engagement? d) how to enhance and deepen learning at each stage throughout the

student journey through the programme by providing adequate support at the following points of intervention:

i) pre-entry; ii) induction/transition; iii) early teaching weeks; iv) mid teaching weeks; v) examinations and assessments; vi) post-examination follow-up and progression?

e) how to ensure students are progressively taught academic enquiry and

associated information and academic literacy skills throughout their programme, and that these skills are drawn out and developed through the module assessments?

f) the emerging work of the QAA Quality Enhancement Theme:

Research-Teaching Linkages? enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/ResearchTeaching/default.asp

g) using NULIS Information Skills Online? www.napier.ac.uk/inform h) how to contribute to the embedding of Personal and Professional

Development Planning www.napier.ac.uk/ed/pdp including Confident Futures www.napier.ac.uk/confidentfutures and developing employability skills in students?


http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/ResearchTeaching/default.asp

http://www.napier.ac.uk/inform

http://www.napier.ac.uk/ed/pdp

http://www.napier.ac.uk/confidentfutures


i) the Programme Planning and Design Section of Quality Framework www.napier.ac.uk/qes/QualityFrameworkIndex.asp and in particular the advice given on the following:

i) developing programme specifications; ii) meeting the requirements of the Scottish Credit and Qualifications

Framework; iii) addressing diversity and considering equal opportunities in

programme design?

j) how you will ensure an equivalence of experience in programme-level provision and support for part-time, flexible, distance and trans-national students?

k) how the Bologna Accord may impact on the design of your

programme? www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/FHEQ/SCQF/SelfCertification2007.asp

Option modules 16 The new programme design rules indicate that each programme will

establish an option pool and that:

a) all students will be given the opportunity to exercise free choice from this programme option pool;

b) the minimum credit for option modules will be 40 credits (equivalent to

two standard 20-credit modules); c) there will be a set of approved co-curricular modules which will

become a part of the option pool for every undergraduate programme in the University.

17 The principle of choice is an important element in helping students

develop as autonomous lifelong learners. In identifying what will constitute the option pool for your programme:

a) can you offer students as much opportunity as possible to exercise

free choice through option credit? The minimum has been set at 40 credits but it is anticipated that few programmes will need to be this restrictive;

b) which other discipline-specific modules, not compulsory or core for the

programme, can be included?

c) which modules from other disciplines can you identify individually as being acceptable option choices for the programme?


http://www.napier.ac.uk/qes/QualityFrameworkIndex.asp

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/FHEQ/SCQF/SelfCertification2007.asp

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/FHEQ/SCQF/SelfCertification2007.asp


d) are there modules which you would like to see offered to all students in the School and/or Faculty?

18 Remember that the option pools are specific to each programme.

Remember too that the option pool is one from which students will make a personal choice. Whilst they may ask for advice, the final choice is theirs, subject to the normal restrictions created by prerequisites and timetabling. However, what you include in the pool will be a message from you to your students about the suitability of options and a further guide to them as they exercise their choices. In this context, you may wish to consider whether there are any specific co-curricular modules to which you would wish to guide your students or, where appropriate, whether there are any such modules which would benefit students if included in the compulsory or core element of your programme. The work to develop these modules is being led by Professor Morag Gray, Associate Dean (Academic Development) in the Faculty of Health, Life and Social Sciences. The completed list will be publicised as soon as possible but please contact Morag Gray if you would like further details or if you have ideas about the development of a co-curricular module (see also Section I, paragraph 15 of this Handbook).

Week 1 19 In the new structure for the academic year, the first week of each trimester

has been defined as a major opportunity for the University to work co-operatively, creatively, and with imagination on a range of activities which will help to establish a beneficial and valuable student experience tailored to the level of study and the precise point in the academic year. It is planned as a joint and co-operative venture between all staff of the University and the NSA to provide a thorough preparation for students comprising administrative, academic, co-curricular and social activities.

20 Those responsible for the implementation of the new academic year will

be planning the precise nature and pattern of Week 1 and more details will become available in the later stages of this academic year and early in the 2007/08 session. However, it will undoubtedly involve staff at school and programme level and consideration should be given as to how you make best use of Week 1 to enable students to engage in broader preparation, programme-based induction events, and other activities. In a more practical sense, module planners will need to take into account that no formal module-related teaching will take place until Week 2.



Week 13 21 The new academic year structure will end the common practice of

describing Week 13 of a trimester as ‘revision week’. With the diversity of assessment instruments used in the University – and given that there will be no formal examinations for Year 1, Trimester 1 students – it is no longer appropriate to designate a common and fixed ‘revision week’. Week 13 will become an opportunity for staff to exercise their judgement and reflect the nature of the module they are designing and delivering and the assessment instruments being used.

22 Doubtless there will be occasions when a period of reflection prior to

formal examination will be the most appropriate use of Week 13. However, in all other cases, staff are encouraged to be creative in their use of it and consider the value of a range of mediated, peer, blended and structured independent learning activities which are matched to the module’s SCQF level and its timing in the academic year.

Weeks 14 and 15 (Level 7/Year 1, Trimester 1) 23 With the removal of closed formal examinations for students at the end of

this trimester, there is the potential for a number of weeks to pass without any structured engagement between the student and the University (in the most extreme case, this might comprise five weeks: Weeks 14 and 15 of Trimester 1, the two-week break around Christmas, and the subsequent inter-trimester week). If you are planning a module at this level and in this trimester, you may still wish to design in methods to ensure that students are engaged in Weeks 14 and 15 in assessment-related tasks. However, if your assessment pattern does not require the use of Weeks 14 and 15, you are asked to design other module-related learning and teaching activities which will ensure that there is no lengthy period of disengagement.

Assessment 24 Programme teams should consider the different types of assessment used

across the programme, with the overall aim of achieving an appropriate mix of assessment types across levels and years that will address the programme aims and learning outcomes, for example, reports, essays, presentations, group work, and examinations.

25 Please note that SCQF Level 7/Year 1 Trimester 1 modules should not

include formal examinations. This is to allow first-year undergraduate students to settle into the University in a supported environment in their first trimester. The emphasis at this stage and time is on continuous assessment. However, class tests or equivalents may be held if they are considered the most appropriate way to assess the learning outcomes. All




learning outcomes should be validly assessed within an assessment scheme, however one assessment instrument can assess more than one learning outcome.

26 In other modules, providing one continuous assessment (coursework) plus

one supervised assessment (an examination or equivalent) is a commonly used model, as it allows students with different approaches to learning and backgrounds to participate in more than one assessment. It also gives students more than one opportunity to demonstrate learning in, and achievement from, different formats. Coursework generally develops independent learning, information and academic literacies and can be linked to employability attributes such as teamwork. Examinations, if designed appropriately, may also develop learning, and are a useful way of assessing students in controlled conditions. A single piece of coursework may be broken down into parts in order to provide formative feedback to students, for example by asking for a draft or plan early in the trimester.

27 You should also consider:

a) how, when and where you will build in the assessment of employability

skills and attributes, that is, agreed aspects of key skills, personal qualities, reflection, and understanding of how organisations work alongside the traditional intellectual skills necessary generically and within your subject area;

b) how you will ensure that students get an appropriate mix of diagnostic,

formative and summative assessment; c) how you will ensure that all students experience a broad range of

appropriate assessment methods, bearing in mind the anticipated diversity of students;

d) whether you are following the Code of Practice for Anonymous

Assessment6. Assessment quantity benchmarks 28 The move from 15-credit to 20-credit modules might logically suggest an

increase in the assessment demands of a module. All module designers are asked to reflect carefully on this apparent logic before deciding on how they will test, through assessment, whether a student has met the learning outcomes of the module. In some cases, it may be that a change to the variety of assessment methods, rather than a simple increase to the module’s quantity of assessment, would be more appropriate.

6 To be published following Academic Board consideration and approval of the Consistency in Assessment Review recommendations in July 2007


29 Whatever changes may be made to a module’s assessment, it is a fundamental principle that the assessment load, and the effort required from students to complete that load successfully, should be broadly equivalent across modules which have the same credit value. For this reason, the University is using the opportunity of the revision of modules for the 20-credit structure to introduce assessment quantity benchmarks.

30 In introducing the concept of such benchmarks, there are a number of

fundamental principles to note:

a) that assessment methods can differ significantly according to the academic discipline, the level of study, and a range of other influencing factors, and that this is a desirable variety which is to be encouraged and promoted in the University;

b) that, accordingly, assessment quantity benchmarks are not intended in

any way to influence or dictate the choice of assessment instruments by staff;

c) that the catalyst for the introduction of assessment quantity

benchmarks is the work of the current Consistency in Assessment Review which will report to Academic Board in July 2007. That review has focused on specific aspects of assessment practice and process in the University, but we should seek consistency – and equity for students – in all areas related to assessment.

31 In essence, assessment quantity benchmarks are simply that –

benchmarks. They have no reality or substance outside a process in which a module planner asks the question: in setting the assessment load for this module, is the general effort required by the student to complete its assessment approximately equivalent to that which – in my professional experience – I know would be required by the assessment quantity benchmarks? For this reason, some standard and probably familiar assessment methods are used to set the benchmark: written coursework and formal examination.

32 In setting the assessment load for a 20-credit module, staff should

compare it to the following quantity benchmarks: about 5000 words of coursework or a three-hour examination.

33 It is intended that the approval procedures described in Section III of this

Handbook will include consideration of whether the assessment loading for each module is fair and appropriate. The assessment quantity benchmarks are a simple tool to assist this process. They will not be used as a measure, a directive or an instruction. They only contribute to the beginning of a discussion between module planners and approval panels, should the assessment load of a particular module warrant such a discussion.



Non-standard modules 34 Anything other than the 20-credit module is considered as non-standard

and Section I of this Handbook describes these variants and the situations in which they may be permitted. In summary, there may be three uses:

a) non-standard undergraduate modules below 20 credits in value where

approval will only be granted exceptionally and usually in cases where there is a documented requirement by a professional body which would affect accreditation status;

b) non-standard undergraduate modules rated at 40 credits where no

special approval will be needed if these are clearly dissertation, project or similar modules;

c) other occasions where a programme team may wish to use a 40-credit

module – or occasions where values in excess of 40 credits are requested. In such instances, a case will need to be made through the approval process and you are advised to consult the appropriate Associate Dean at the earliest opportunity.

35 The decision of Academic Board to adopt a standard 20-credit module,

and to discourage the use of modules carrying other credit values, was influenced by a range of factors including:

a) in a pedagogical context, the wish to reduce the number of individual

modules for which students may be registered concurrently in order to encourage deeper learning;

b) in a structural context, to allow the building blocks of the modular

structure to match in order to promote cross-Faculty and cross-University academic programme developments.

36 For these reasons, programme and module designers are asked to

consider carefully the need for the introduction of non-standard modules. Particular thought should be given to modules of 40 credits or more (other than standard dissertations or projects) in the context of assessment. The proportion of a level of study which such a module will occupy may have a potentially dramatic affect on a student’s award.

Other general issues in module development 37 The following areas correspond to guidance points within the Learning,

Teaching and Assessment Strategy and provide a checklist of points to bear in mind or consider when designing and redesigning modules.




Design for learning 38 In respect of design for learning:

a) are the learning outcomes clearly and appropriately written in terms of what the students should achieve and are they SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-limited)? www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=347

b) are the aims and learning outcomes appropriate to the SCQF level of

the module? www.scqf.org.uk/ c) is the learning, teaching and assessment approach clearly aligned with

the learning outcomes, in terms of the content and the type of student engagement and activity? Biggs (2003) Chapter 27

d) is the indicative reading list up to date and relevant? Have you

identified a wider reading list and are the items all available to the students?

e) is the balance between face-to-face, blended, practical activities,

assessment and independent learning appropriate?

Delivery for effective learning 39 In respect of delivery for effective learning:

a) have you included an orientation to the module, clarifying the focus, requirements and the place of the module in the context of the programme, integrating the students socially, setting ground rules and reducing student anxiety? Get Ready for University Study www.napier.ac.uk/GUS/

b) will your students receive guidance on how to become independent

and effective learners and use their study time effectively? Will they understand the rationale for activities and tasks, and how they relate to learning on an ongoing basis?

c) have you considered how online tools and resources could best

support your module? For example, through providing further opportunities for seminar-style discussion, using online problem forums to deal with common student questions, or through providing access to additional materials and relevant groups or individuals outwith your module? Smyth and Mainka (2006)8

7 Biggs, J (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 2nd edition, Buckingham, The Society for Research in Higher Education and Open University Press 8 Smyth K and Mainka C (2006) Pedagogy and learning technology: a practical guide, Edinburgh, Napier University

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=347


http://www.scqf.org.uk/

http://www.napier.ac.uk/GUS/


d) is your use of WebCT and other educational technologies appropriate to aims, learning outcomes and student needs? If your students need preparation for online learning, what plans have you made? Educational technologies www.napier.ac.uk/webct/staff/resources.html

e) have you systematically built in learning structures which promote

attendance? Is there enough variation of activity and focus to maximise student engagement?

Academic and information literacies

40 In respect of academic and information literacies:

a) does your module develop academic literacies or writing for learning, for example, by providing practice opportunities during the module, such as short writing tasks? Queen Mary, University of London ‘Thinking Writing’ www.thinkingwriting.qmul.ac.uk

b) does your module develop student information literacies, for example,

by inviting a member of NULIS staff to do a session with your students on searching and selecting information? NULIS Information Skills Online www.napier.ac.uk/inform

Diversity

41 In respect of diversity: a) have you considered students with special needs? Is your approach

fully inclusive? www.napier.ac.uk/depts/sss/SpecialNeeds/staff/default.html

b) is your approach and treatment of students fully inclusive and non-

discriminatory in terms of gender, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation and ability/disability? staff.napier.ac.uk/Services/HR/Equality+and+Diversity/ and www.universities-scotland.ac.uk/raceequalitytoolkit/


http://www.napier.ac.uk/webct/staff/resources.html

http://www.thinkingwriting.qmul.ac.uk/

http://www.napier.ac.uk/inform/

http://www.napier.ac.uk/depts/sss/SpecialNeeds/staff/default.html

http://staff.napier.ac.uk/Services/HR/Equality+and+Diversity/

http://www.universities-scotland.ac.uk/raceequalitytoolkit/



c) have you considered diverse student groups, some of whom who may need particular support in your teaching, for example, non-traditional entrants? www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=318 and www.latrobe.edu.au/adu/inc_curriculum.htm

d) have you adapted your approach to facilitate integration and learning

for your international students? www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsd/2_learntch/briefing_papers/international_students.pdf

e) are you involved in programmes delivered overseas, and have you

considered the particular demands of this context and issues of consistency on your module? www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/learningconnection/staff/practice/transnational.asp

Student attributes

42 In respect of student attributes:

a) does your module focus on and develop student employability attributes which will enhance their employment prospects? www.heacademy.ac.uk/Employability.htm and www.napier.ac.uk/confidentfutures

b) does your module encourage and provide the student with an

opportunity to develop their Personal and Professional Development Planning (PDP)? www.napier.ac.uk/ed/pdp/

c) what opportunities for real or simulated work-based experience are

included in the module? d) does your module provide the students with a research and knowledge

transfer experience? Research may be interpreted broadly to include a focus on research content, the interpretation of research and research processes, in addition to engaging students in primary research and enquiry-based learning. www.brookes.ac.uk/genericlink/ and Healey (2005)9

9 Healey, M (2005) ‘Linking research and teaching exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning’, in Barnett, R (ed) Reshaping the university: new relationships between research, scholarship and teaching, pp30–42, Maidenhead, McGraw-Hill/Open University Press



http://www.latrobe.edu.au/adu/inc_curriculum.htm

http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsd/2_learntch/briefing_papers/international_students.pdf

http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsd/2_learntch/briefing_papers/international_students.pdf

http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/learningconnection/staff/practice/transnational.asp

http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/learningconnection/staff/practice/transnational.asp

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/Employability.htm

http://www.napier.ac.uk/confidentfutures

http://www.napier.ac.uk/ed/pdp/

http://www.brookes.ac.uk/genericlink/



Assessment for high quality learning 43 In respect of assessment for high quality learning:

a) are the assessment strategies aligned with the learning outcomes, that is, do the assessments really focus on the learning outcomes you want to assess and give the students a fair chance to demonstrate learning? Biggs (2003) Chapter 210

b) will your assessment strategy not only test, but develop student

learning (assessment for learning as well as assessment of learning)? www.heacademy.ac.uk/asshe/

c) is your assessment strategy valid – does it really test what it aims to

test? Is it reliable – can it be replicated accurately? Is it fair to the students? Is it practical for the students and staff? Freeman and Lewis (2002) Chapter 311

d) does your module include formative assessment and feedback (or

‘feed-forward’) for future learning, during the trimester? www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=353

e) have you considered the assessment quantity benchmarks and how

they might inform the assessment load for the module? f) will your students receive and analyse clearly-written and transparent

assessment criteria in advance of assessment? Freeman and Lewis (2002) Chapter 512

g) have you varied your assessments in order to be fair to students with

different learning needs, approaches and previous educational experiences?

h) have you considered whether innovative assessment strategies would

be useful for assessing the learning outcomes? www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=431 and Biggs (2003) Chapter 913

10 Biggs, J (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 2nd edition, Buckingham, The Society for Research in Higher Education and Open University Press 11 Freeman, R and Lewis, R (2002) Planning and implementing assessment, London, Kogan Page 12 ibid. 13 Biggs, J (2003) Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 2nd edition, Buckingham, The Society for Research in Higher Education and Open University Press

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/asshe/






i) have you ensured that you have ‘designed out’ opportunities for plagiarism or academic misconduct, for example, by avoiding repetition of tasks from previous trimesters or very common and predictable topics, by personalising the task or making it current? JISC Plagiarism Advisory Service www.jiscpas.ac.uk/

j) Will your students receive clear guidance on how to produce work

using appropriate academic conduct? www.napier.ac.uk/ed/plagiarism/

For additional support and advice in relation to this section of the Handbook, please contact: Fred Percival (Educational Development)


http://www.jiscpas.ac.uk/

http://www.napier.ac.uk/ed/plagiarism/

The 20-Credit Handbook Section III

Section III: The approval process for modules and programmes 1 In respect of approval processes, the transition to the new 20-credit

modular structure requires a robust, logical and streamlined approach that:

a) is fit for purpose; b) meets our internal expectations; c) articulates with the requirements of relevant external stakeholders.

2 The following modified approval processes will help to ensure that module

and programme approval decisions continue to be informed by full consideration of academic standards and of the appropriateness of the learning opportunities which will be offered to students.

3 The approval processes for modules and programmes are in three

phases:

Phase 1: the establishment of a School culture for provision in the 20-credit modular structure;

Phase 2: the approval of the revised individual modules; Phase 3: the approval of programmes.

4 The move to a revised modular structure was approved by Academic

Board to support the delivery of key objectives in our Strategic Plan, the Academic Strategy, and the strategy documents related to Quality Enhancement and Learning, Teaching and Assessment. As a University, we are committed to:

a) continually improving learning, teaching and assessment; b) embedding employability and PDP; c) internationalising our curriculum; d) addressing the need for scholarly skills; e) supporting diversity.

Phase 1: The establishment of a School culture for provision in the 20-credit modular structure 5 The purpose of this phase in the approval process is to enable Schools to

set out their position and approach to each of the areas listed in paragraph 4 above. In setting out the overall culture which will define its approach, each School will engage in a dialogue which will lead to the appropriate Faculty Learning, Teaching and Assessment Committee ‘signing-off’ each School’s position.


Section III The 20-Credit Handbook

6 The process will require each School to submit a concise document setting out how it plans to approach the delivery in each area. Subsequently, School staff will engage in a developmental discussion with a group of colleagues drawn from a group including the Vice-Principal (Academic Development); the Vice-Principal (Academic Quality and Customer Service); the Dean of Faculty; parent Faculty representatives; academic colleagues from at least one other Faculty; staff drawn from Educational Development and Quality Enhancement Services; and an academic peer from another University. The group will be convened by the Associate Dean with responsibility for academic development in the parent Faculty. It is anticipated that each School event will take place over an extended half-day.

7 The outcomes of these discussions will inform the re-development and

approval of modules and should take place as early as possible (no later than the end of September 2007) and before final decisions are made on the content and delivery of individual modules.

Phase 2: The approval of modules 8 The purpose of this phase in the approval process is to ensure that all

modules meet the University’s criteria for module design and delivery as set out in the Academic Guidance sections of the Quality Framework. This includes:

a) appropriateness of academic standards of the proposed module; b) appropriateness of the subject content of the proposed module in

relation to the subject benchmark statement; c) appropriateness of the level of the proposed module in relation to the

Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF); d) extent to which the proposal complies with the University’s Academic

Regulations; e) appropriateness of the intended learning outcomes to the level of the

proposed module; f) extent to which employability skills/PDP have been embedded in the

proposed module; g) adequacy of the learning, teaching and assessment approach to

achieve the intended learning outcomes; h) where appropriate, whether the requirements of any professional

bodies have been met.



9 The approval process will be a partnership between the Faculties and Quality Enhancement Services (QES) and all modules will be considered and approved by a joint panel. Schools will be asked to demonstrate that they have sought and taken account of external peer subject advice during the development process for all modules and prior to submission for approval. Schools may choose to invite current or past external examiners to undertake this exercise.

10 Joint Faculty/QES panels will be established to consider modules in

coherent packages in a process that will be completed by December 2007. The documentation will contain a rationale for any requests for exemptions to the regulations which includes evidence of external imperatives (for example, professional body requirements). The panels will include parent Faculty representatives from each School and at least one representative from both another Faculty and QES. The Panel will be chaired by the appropriate Associate Dean (Academic Quality & Customer Service).

11 Where modules are not approved, advice will be given on changes

necessary for approval to be achieved. Reports from the Joint Faculty/QES approval panels will be submitted to Faculty Quality Committees and then collated, analysed and submitted to the University Quality Committee.

Phase 3: The approval of programmes 12 The purpose of this phase is to ensure that proposals for programmes of

study:

a) are compatible with the University’s Academic Strategy and wider Strategic Plan;

b) meet the requirements for an award of the University; c) meet the requirements set out by Academic Board in approving the

revised modular structure. 13 All programmes will be considered by a standing University Panel drawn

from: Vice Principal (Academic Development), Vice Principal (Academic Quality & Customer Service), Deans of Faculty, Associate Deans (Academic Development and Academic Quality & Customer Service), Director of QES, Convenor and Secretary of the Regulations Committee, and other senior Faculty academic staff with experience in quality processes and the academic infrastructure. This process will be completed by February 2008.

14 Schools will submit, via their Faculty, the following documentation for each

programme/suite of programmes:



a) a Programme Specification using the template at http://www.napier.ac.uk/deptsmas/Qes/Quality%20Framework/Proformas/Planning&Design/AP2_ProgrammeSpec.doc

b) a diagram of the programme structure (Diagrams 1 and 5 in Appendix I

of this Handbook may be used); c) the option pool for the programme; d) a rationale for any request for an exemption from the standard

University regulations for awards which includes appropriate evidence (for example, of external imperatives including professional body requirements).

15 For new programmes being offered for the first time the business case,

including a review of resources and the potential markets for student recruitment and graduate employment, will be completed within the parent Faculty before the programme comes forward to the standing University Panel.

16 For collaborative programmes, discussions will take place between the

Faculty and QES to determine the most appropriate approval method and the timing of the presentation of the programme. The Collaborative Provision Sub-Committee will be consulted where necessary.

17 Where programmes are not approved, advice will be given on changes

necessary for approval to be achieved. Reports from the standing University Panel will be submitted to Faculty Quality Committees and then collated, analysed and submitted to the University Quality Committee.

Module Descriptor and Programme Validation Databases 18 The implementation of the 20-credit structure creates an excellent

opportunity to replace the existing Module Descriptor Database and the Programme Validation Database. Replacement databases will be developed and implemented within SITS for September 2007.

19 All modules will be written using a revised module descriptor. The revised

descriptor will take full account of developments in learning, teaching, assessment and the national academic infrastructure (SCQF, QAA Code of Practice, Subject Benchmark Statements and Programme Specifications).

20 The new module descriptor is being developed and there will be further

consultation with Schools and Faculties on the content before a final version goes forward to the SITS Development Team. The descriptor template will be agreed by mid-June 2007 and the schedule for provision of a fully operational module descriptor database is September 2007.


http://www.napier.ac.uk/deptsmas/Qes/Quality%20Framework/Proformas/Planning&Design/AP2_ProgrammeSpec.doc

http://www.napier.ac.uk/deptsmas/Qes/Quality%20Framework/Proformas/Planning&Design/AP2_ProgrammeSpec.doc


21 The plans for the module database take account of a range of issues including: the location of all fields in the module descriptor in a single database; the provision of drop-down menus in fields where the content is systematically chosen from a restricted range; the inclusion of the dates and periods of a module’s approval; and the provision of fields targeted particularly either for staff or for students. The database will be linked into the University’s web pages.

Academic regulations in the revised modular structure 22 The revision of the academic regulations for implementation from 2008 will

take full account of the revision of the modular structure and the work of the Consistency in Assessment Review Group which will be considered at the July 2007 meeting of Academic Board.

23 The revised regulations will be written after Academic Board decisions in

July 2007. Draft regulations will be circulated for comment in September 2007 before final amendment and subsequent submission, for approval, to the Regulations Sub-Committee in November 2007. This date is earlier than the standard schedule for approval (February 2008) to ensure that staff have adequate notice of the full regulatory framework within which modules and programmes will be offered, and continuing students have ample opportunity to receive guidance on the regulations in operation for the remainder of their programmes of study, especially the regulations governing the credit requirements for their award.

24 All programmes will operate the standard University regulations for the

appropriate award. Exemptions will be approved in the very few situations where a case is made and accepted (for example, professional body requirements). The credit requirements for awards are set out in Section I of this Handbook.

25 In respect of Transition Regulations for Stages 2, 3 and 4, the majority of

continuing students and direct entrants will migrate to the new modular structure in September 2008. Transition arrangements will need to be made for the regulations governing their progression and the conferment of awards. For students who begin their programme in the second trimester (February 2008), discussion has still to take place to decide the timing of the transition to the new scheme.

26 Transition regulations will be developed once the revised regulations for

the new modular structure, as a whole, have been approved. Principles which will govern the transition regulations are:

a) the aims and objectives of the programme on which students are

already enrolled will be met by the revised scheme;



b) no additional burdens will be imposed on students, for example, in terms of volume of work or assessment;

c) the grading of any award that an individual student might receive will

not be affected adversely; d) the arrangements will be as simple as possible to keep the additional

administrative burden on staff to a minimum and to maximise transparency for staff and students;

e) students will not be disadvantaged in terms of the total volume of credit

they will be required to study to achieve an award; f) staff will take a holistic approach to the transfer of students to the

revised modular structure and will avoid implementing special arrangements except where this is essential to meet the aims and objectives of programmes.

For additional support and advice in relation to this section of the Handbook, please contact: Anne Sibbald (Quality Enhancement Services)


The 20-Credit Handbook Section IV

Section IV: An outline of the required systems and process changes 1 This section provides an outline of the changes which will be required to

the SITS:Vision student records system (NIMROD) and the timetabling system (Syllabus Plus) to support the implementation of the 20-credit modular structure.

2 At this stage it is not possible to give a precise timetable, but this

programme of work will be carried out between October 2007 and June 2008 and it would be extremely helpful if the necessary flows of information could begin as soon as possible. In particular it will be important to complete the approval processes described in Section III in a timely manner. The whole of this operation will require close collaboration between staff of Registry Services, Quality Enhancement Services and the Faculties.

3 Within the general implementation plans for the introduction of the new

academic year and the revised modular structure, there will be a series of working groups with responsibility for overseeing the implementation of each system. Registry Services will be taking the lead to ensure that the key milestones are met. There will also be a programme of related training and support.

SITS:Vision (NIMROD) student record system changes 4 This paragraph sets out the key stages for the SITS:Vision system

changes indicating the chronological order in which they will be undertaken:

a) all programmes of study to be set up; b) all programmes of study to be attached to appropriate Intended and

Exit Awards; c) all programmes of study to be attached to progression rules for each

stage of study; d) all applicants to be attached (transferred on) to new programmes; e) all modules to be set up, including programme option pools; f) all new module mark/grade schemes to be set up; g) mark/grade schemes to be attached to modules as appropriate;


Section IV The 20-Credit Handbook

h) all new academic awards and award and classification calculation rules to be set up;

i) all new progression rules, calculations and recommendations to be set

up;

j) testing of all award and classification calculations, for all permutations; k) testing of all progression rule calculations, for each stage, for all

permutations; l) all programme structures to be set up; m) all students to be attached (transferred on) to new programmes.

Syllabus Plus timetabling system changes 5 This paragraph sets out the key stages for the Syllabus Plus timetabling

system changes indicating the chronological order in which they will be undertaken:

a) academic year requires to be set up, setting out teaching week

patterns and dates; b) campus locations and availabilities to be set up; c) all new modules to be set up; d) all staff availability teaching allocations to be set up; e) new blocking and preference scheduling for activities to be set up; f) student numbers and student set allocations to be set up; g) activity breakdown of all modules; h) work relating to input of service requests; i) work relating to input of data; j) test and preference scheduling; k) proposed draft timetable published – academic checking; l) final timetable for Trimester 1 2008/09 published.


The 20-Credit Handbook Section IV


New coding conventions 6 A new module coding convention has been devised for all new 20-credit

modules. The coding convention will be finalised once the School subject groups are known for all Faculties by June 2007. However, the breakdown of the new module code will be:

XXX12307 Where: XXX = the subject area defined by acronym 123 = the local School/Faculty code increment commencing with 100 07 = the SCQF academic level (hence these last two digits would be 07, 08, 09, 10 or 11.

7 A new programme of study (course) coding convention will be devised by

July 2007. For additional support and advice in relation to this section of the Handbook, please contact: Cathy Lambert (Registry Services)

The 20-Credit Handbook Appendix I


Appendix I: Programme Design Templates The following Programme Design Templates for undergraduate programmes illustrate how programme designers may place modules into stages to meet the new University modular programme requirements. The grid is not trimester-specific. So, for example, the dissertation at Stage 4 may be scheduled into one trimester or over two trimesters. All students must have an option slot in Stage 1 and are entitled to take a minimum of 40 credits of options in their degree programme. Programme design is not restricted to these patterns and hence alternative programme patterns may be developed. The level on each module slot shows how modules from a lower level can be incorporated into a stage and still allow students to meet University requirements. This should allow flexibility in module choice for students. Diagram 1: Indicative Programme Design Grid using 20-credit modules Diagram 2: Example of Single Honours with 300 Compulsory and Core credits

and 180 Options credits Diagram 3: Example of Major with Minor Programme

Major with 240 Compulsory and Core credits, Minor with 100 Compulsory and Core credits, and 140 credits of Option credits

Diagram 4: Example of Joint Subject Programme, each with 160 Compulsory and Core credits, and 160 Optional credits

Diagram 5: Blank Template for Programme Design.

Appendix I The 20-Credit Handbook

Diagram 1: Indicative Programme Design Grid using 20-credit modules

Stage 4 Honours Degree

Dissertation Level 10

Dissertation Level 10 Level 10 Level 10 Level 10 Level ¥

Stage 3 (Bachelor Degree)

Level 9 Level 9 Level 9 Level 9 Level ¥ Level ¥

Stage 2 (Dip HE) Level 8 Level 8 Level 8 Level 8 Level 8 Level ¥

Stage 1 (Cert HE) Level 7 Level 7 Level 7 Level 7 Level 7 Level 7

Option

This grid is not trimester-specific. The module levels show a pattern to allow a student to achieve the minimum requirement for an Honours Degree. The Dissertation at Honours may be in one trimester or over two trimesters.

All students have an Option slot in Stage 1 and where the programme only offers 40 credits from options it is expected that students take the second option module in Stage 2 or 3.

Honours Degree Credit requirement is 480 credits with at least 100 at Level 10, plus a further 80 at Level 9, plus a further 120 at Level 8.

Bachelor Degree Credit requirement is 360 credits with 60 at Level 9, plus a further 100 at Level 8.

Dip HE Credit requirement is 240 credits with 100 at Level 8.

The module schedule will allow a successful student to exit at any stage with the appropriate stage award.

¥ = One of these modules must be Level 8 or above to meet Honours Degree requirements. In addition the level is determined by the programme design requirements.



Diagram 2: Example of Single Honours with 300 Compulsory and Core credits and 180 Options credits



Compulsory


Compulsory

Level 10 Compulsory/

Core


Core Level 10 Option

Level ¥ Option


Level 9 Compulsory/

Core

Level 9 Compulsory/

Core

Level 9 Compulsory/

Core Level 9 Option

Level ¥ Option

Level ¥ Option

Stage 2 (Dip HE)

Level 8 Compulsory/

Core

Level 8 Compulsory/

Core

Level 8 Compulsory/

Core Level 8 Option

Level 8 Option

Level ¥ Option

Stage 1 (Cert HE)

Level 7 Compulsory/

Core

Level 7 Compulsory/

Core

Level 7 Compulsory/

Core

Level 7 Compulsory/

Core

Level 7 Compulsory/

Core Level 7 Option

¥ = One of these modules must be Level 8 or above to meet Honours Degree requirements.



Diagram 3: Example of Major with Minor Programme Major with 240 Compulsory and Core credits, Minor with 100 Compulsory and Core credits, and 140 credits of Option credits



Compulsory Major


Compulsory Major

Level 10 Compulsory/ Core Major


Level 10 Compulsory/ Core Minor

Level 9/10 Compulsory/ Core Minor




Level 9 Option

Level ¥ Option

Level ¥ Option


Stage 2 (Dip HE)



Level 8 Option

Level 8 Option

Level ¥ Option


Stage 1 (Cert HE)





Level 7 Option





Diagram 4: Example of Joint Subject Programme, each with 160 Compulsory and Core credits, and 160 Optional credits


Level 9/10 Compulsory/

Core J1 Ω


Core J1


Compulsory J1/J2


Compulsory J1/J2


Core J2

Level 9/10 Compulsory/

Core J2 Ω


Level 9 Compulsory/

Core J1 Level 9 Option

Level ¥ Option

Level ¥ Option

Level 9 Compulsory/

Core J2

Level 9 Compulsory/

Core J2

Stage 2 (Dip HE)

Level 8 Compulsory/

Core J1

Level 8 Compulsory/


Level ¥ Option

Level 8 Option

Level 8 Compulsory/

Core J2

Stage 1 (Cert HE)

Level 7 Compulsory/

Core J1

Level 7 Compulsory/


Level 7 Option

Level 7 Compulsory/

Core J2

Level 7 Compulsory/

Core J2


Ω = One of these modules must be Level 10, the other can be Level 9 or 10.




Diagram 5: Blank Template for Programme Design



Dissertation Level 10 Level 10 Level 10 Level 10 Level


Level 9 Level 9 Level 9 Level 9 Level Level

Stage 2 (Dip HE) Level 8 Level 8 Level 8 Level 8 Level 8 Level

Stage 1 (Cert HE) Level 7 Level 7 Level 7 Level 7 Level 7 Level 7

Option

The 20-Credit Handbook Appendix II

Appendix II: References and further resources Promoting Learning for Achieving Potential Napier University’s Strategy for Learning, Teaching and Assessment (2005): www.napier.ac.uk/ed/pdf/LTA_Final_2005_1.pdf Enhancing Reputation and Supporting Growth Napier University’s Strategy for Quality Enhancement (2005): http://www.napier.ac.uk/qes/QES_Final_2005_1.pdf Quality Framework: www.napier.ac.uk/qes/QualityFrameworkIndex.asp Higher Education Academy (HEA): www.heacademy.ac.uk/ HEA Subject Network: www.heacademy.ac.uk/SubjectNetwork.htm HEA Scotland: www.heacademy.ac.uk/scotland.htm Quality Assurance Agency (Scotland): www.qaa.ac.uk/scotland Quality Enhancement Themes: www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk

The First Year: www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/FirstYear

Flexible Delivery: www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/FlexibleDelivery

Integrative Assessment: www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/IntegrativeAssessment

Research-Teaching Linkages: www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/ResearchTeaching

Assessment: www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/Assessment

Employability: www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/Employability

Responding to Student Needs: www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/StudentNeeds Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework: www.scqf.org.uk/ Equality and Diversity at Napier University: staff.napier.ac.uk/Services/HR/Equality+and+Diversity/ Lifelong Learning: www.napier.ac.uk/depts/Life_Long_Learning/communities.asp?parent_id=4 The International College: staff.napier.ac.uk/Services/international/


http://www.napier.ac.uk/ed/pdf/LTA_Final_2005_1.pdf

http://www.napier.ac.uk/qes/QES_Final_2005_1.pdf

http://www.napier.ac.uk/qes/QualityFrameworkIndex.asp

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/SubjectNetwork.htm

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/scotland.htm

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/scotland

http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/

http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/FirstYear

http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/FlexibleDelivery

http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/IntegrativeAssessment

http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/ResearchTeaching

http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/Assessment

http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/Employability

http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/themes/StudentNeeds

http://www.scqf.org.uk/

http://staff.napier.ac.uk/Services/HR/Equality+and+Diversity/

http://www.napier.ac.uk/depts/Life_Long_Learning/communities.asp?parent_id=4

http://staff.napier.ac.uk/Services/international/

Appendix II The 20-Credit Handbook

Student Support Services: www.napier.ac.uk/depts/sss/ssshome.html EdDev: www.napier.ac.uk/ed TechDis: www.techdis.ac.uk/ Teachability: www.teachability.strath.ac.uk/ Race Equality Toolkit: www.universities-scotland.ac.uk/raceequalitytoolkit/


http://www.napier.ac.uk/depts/sss/ssshome.html

http://www.napier.ac.uk/ed/profdev/

http://www.techdis.ac.uk/

http://www.teachability.strath.ac.uk/

http://www.universities-scotland.ac.uk/raceequalitytoolkit/

the 20-credit handbook - staff intranet

Documents