Thank you very much for this reply Gary. This issues you raise are very
similar for us. Over the last 2-3 years we've gone though very detailed
discussions with Heads of Schools re their course portfolios as, within the
Modular Scheme, we had a proliferation of awards (lots of subject X with
y/with z/with etc). This year, we're paying much more attenion to modules
and have asked Schools to review all modules with less than 20 students. As
you say, one factor is obviously the fee status of the students. Heads have
often cited 'shared' modules, as an excuse, but we're really testing this
this year. All course stuctures for next session have to be submitted by
end of April, so that we can check in detail.
I've had 3 other responses to date and will prepare a summary if its of any
interest.
Thanks again.
Sheena.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Colin Tindell [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 10 April 2002 10:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Programme/Module Viability
Sheena,
We undertake a similar exercise each year as part of our academic planning
meetings with schools. One of the major criteria for these meetings is
module
enrolments and we provide a list of module populations for each school.
Heads
of school are asked to comment on those modules with less than 15 students
and to detail plans for module rationalisation or revalidation. In practice,
we've often found that some modules with low populations are taught together
with other modules, so that some costs are shared. However, this process of
examining module populations has significantly focused Heads attention on
delivering cost-effective programmes and has resulted in a rationalisation
of
the modules we offer . One other key factor relates to the price banding of
the programme and the modules contributing to that course. For courses
attracting Price Band B funding, the number of students required on modules
falls to something like 8 enrolments and pro-rata for the other price bands.
Hope this is helpful
Gary
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sheena Stewart [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 08 April 2002 10:48
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Programme/Module Viability
>
>
> Dear colleagues
>
> We are trying to draw together viability/sustainability
> criteria for both
> programmes and modules. For example, for modules we want to
> identify a
> threshold number of enrolled students, below which
> departments must provide
> justification. Other proposed criteria are a) the number of modules
> provided by departments, b) the ratio of modules per staff member, c)
> proportion of funded students per module and so on. We have
> a portfolio
> review group as a sub-committee of planning and resources
> committee. This
> group currently approves the addition of new programme proposals and
> proposals for discontinuing programmes. The group also wishes to
> rationalise the whole portfolio of modules across the University.
>
> I'd be grateful for any information that people might care to
> send in this
> regard and of course to share general findings.
>
> Thanks
>
> Sheena Stewart
> Senior Academic Services Officer
> University of Abertay Dundee
>
>
>
|