One problem with modular courses is that the QAA are trying to enforce the
idea that students should "pass" every module they take (and maybe every
learning outcome!). This would put them at a major disadvantage as compared
to students on a more traditional course, where nobody outside the exam
board knows which parts of the course have been passed or failed. In an
example of a non-modular course I know it is possible to get a first-class
honours mark by doing no work at all on roughly half the courses,
best wishes,
Paul Strickland.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of ANDREW JACKSON
> Sent: 05 October 2000 11:58
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Modularity
>
>
> Since the subject has been raised in this initial burst of e-mails, let's
> have heated debate about modularity...
>
> Our institution (Kent Institute of Art and Design) is in the process of
> 'becoming unitised' - the first meeting with academic staff to discuss the
> issues involved is today...
>
> Anecdotal reporting would seem to suggest that the majority of staff here
> have misgivings about this change. What do list members think? Has anyone
> successfully resisted modularity in their institution? Or is it the best
> thing that's ever happened to higher education. I'd like to hear arguments
> both for and against.
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
