Issues for Discussion at the VC meeting to consider the following proposal:
Proposal Name: / 1. Fnd Degree The Art of Games Design
2. Fnd Multimedia
Category: / Full
Date of VC Meeting: / Wednesday 30 April 2008
The Course Team are invited to begin the event by introducing the programme to the Panel
1. Learning Resources/questions for the Dean
CP / The OPPP isn’t actually signed off by the various heads of service or PDSC. Has it actually been scrutinised and approved by these people?CP / How does part time provision affect the total staff hourage needed for this programme? Will part time students be attending at the same time as full time?
CP / How is the expenditure here being split with other programmes? Are the resources indicated on each OPPP exclusive to that course or are they shared? If the answer is different for different resources, does that need to be made explicit?
CP / Will replacing one programme with several just divide student numbers unhelpfully? Will you get more students or the same number divided across several courses?
CP / Section 2.2. Shouldn’t cumulative student totals be indicated? For example, by year 4 won’t there be 12 part time students at various stages of completion? The cumulative total of students will have an effect on the total amount of resourcing needed (e.g. support staff and consumables)
CP / Sections 3.1 and 3.2-Won’t consumables and support staff time continue to rise as cumulative totals of students rise?
CP / Section 3.5 - Expenditure of £40,000: how is this being recouped or subsidised? What proportion of this does each of these FdAs need to contribute?
CP / Section 4.1 - No staff time development costs, although staff development issues are identified in the programme briefing document
CP / Section 4.8 - Why is UoC paying for picture frames rather than students?
CP / Appendix 1 - No break even point indicated. What is it?
CP / Section 2.8 - Are additional tutorial opportunities ‘costed’ in the MDF hours or are they additional?
CP / Programme Briefing Document - Section 3.1 - Time will be given for staff development. This isn’t in the OPPPP
2. Revalidations
2.1 Matters Arising from Critical Review
N/A2.2 Transition Arrangements
N/A2.3 Issues arising from discussion with students
3.
N/A3. Programme Aims & Outcomes
CP / Section 2.3 - Much of this seems to be addressed to an audience other than students on the programme (perhaps the validation panel?). Does the sense of audience and purpose in this section need to be reviewed?CP / Section 2.3 - Is second person used consistently throughout?
CP / Section 2.3 - Is it right that the technology needs to be mastered before creativity can be developed? If that is so is that expressed in an appropriately positive way here?
CP / Section 2.4 - Is the bullet pointed list actually aims? Should it match with the aims of the Programme Specification?
CP / Section 3 - What is the key thing that distinguishes level 5 from level 4? How clearly is that captured here? How does this section map onto the UoC wide level descriptors?
LM / Title - This is very general and doesn’t tell me that it refers to digital games design
DM / Prog HBk Rationale and Aims and Prog Spec p1 need to articulate relationship with FdA benchmark.
DM / Generally little sense of what each award is about from programme documentation – these seem to be rather general in their tone/content. What is distinctive about these degrees? Aims p7 could be more specific as could Prog Spec p2
4. Curriculum
4.1 Modules
CP / Section 6 - Learning to Learn is never taught. Shouldn’t it appear somewhere in a foundation degree? How about in the PDP modules?CP / Section 6 - We are told that team and group work is central to practice in this area (it is actually the first programme aim listed) but this is the skill that is T,P or A less than any other (fewer than half the modules in Multimedia. Only 3 in Games Design). Is that right?
CP / Section 6 - Is numeracy really P in all the modules? If so where is it T?
CP / MDFs - Indicative student workload sometimes shows 9 or 12 hours of tutorials. Is this per student or per group? If the latter it needs to be changed on MDFs.
CP / Contact hours seem too high on all modules. (Perhaps Arts Faculty has different hourages?)
CP / Assessment loads seem to be shown in the wrong ‘currency’ on all modules, which suggest that all the time that is not contact time is allocated to assessment. This is contrary to CDLT guidance on assessment practice. In some places wordages rather than hours are needed.
CP / Very high hours given to ‘lectures’. Are these really lectures or is this being used as a ‘catch all’ term for a range of other experiences? The programme handbook says a wide range of T&L approaches are used. That is not clear from the MDFs in which lectures seem to dominate T&L.
CP / Where are the classic texts on theories of narrative? (e.g. Barthes, Greimas, Ricouer, Genette) etc.
DM / Rationale for no personal development module until Y2? Assume this is where key study skills are addressed.
DM / Rationale for assessment recorded in hours not wordage? And total module learning hours – consistency?
DM / Need a consistent approach re style of aims, outcomes and content.
Aims – statement of general learning intentions normally paragraph style
Content – topics to be covered.
What students do more appropriate in L&T strategy.
Student Workload – repeated use of “lectures” – needs to reflect L&T strategy
Several modules specify “tutorials” students might assume hours are their entitlement to individual tutorials. Suggest “group/tutorials” or more realistic hourage.
DM / Visualisation 1 - , aims lack clarity
PDP 1 – aim lacking, suggests task rather than intended learning.
- “basic web authoring skills” appropriate at degree level?
- bibliography need updating.
Intro to MM Design – include evaluation of work of others?
4.1a Availability of modules as ‘stand alone’
CP / Section 5 - Is it right that there are no prerequisites for any level 5 modules?CP / MDFs - None available as stand alone. Why?
4.2 Structure
CP / Section 2.8 - Why is the glossary limited to only these 3 examples \when there are so many more methods indicated elsewhere?CP / Section 2.11 - I am not sure whether email forwarding works with the current IT system.
CP / Section 2.14 - Should the bullet pointed list include students’ teaching and learning responsibilities?
CP / MDFs - PDP1, 2 and 3 - Should all key skills be covered in these modules?
CP / MDFs - PDP1, 2 and 3 - Team working was given a high profile elsewhere in the documents. Should this be included in PDP modules?
DM / Widening Participation:
Have team considered making modules available as stand-alone and linking to University Awards?
4.2a Student Progression
CP / Section 2.7 - Why can’t students transfer to the Art of Games or Multimedia?CP / MDFs - Multimedia and Interactivity 2 - What is the progression from Multimedia and Interactivity 1?
DM / Need to explain progression from Y1 to Y2 requirements. Prog HBk p8 and p18
DM / Progression Route: - Must be available or validated at the same time as FDA according to Threshold criteria for FDA.
4.3 Assessment Strategy
CP / Section 7.11 - Great stuff about groupwork. Should it be reflected in 7.2?CP / MDFs – Video Production and FX - Do we need more information about the assessed items?
CP / MDFs – Video Production and FX - Where is teamwork assessed as shown on the curriculum skills map?
CP / MDFs - How does a sketchbook assess ILO 4?
DM / Prog HBk p18 a grid mapping assessment strategies to modules would provide a useful overview
4.4 Learning & Teaching
CP / MDFs - Does the T&L diet differ for people on the part time course? Use of FDL is mentioned elsewhere in the documentation. Where is it here?CP / MDFs - How many of the additional notes are needed on the MDFs?
CP / Section 5 - Are there schemes that allow the use of other HEI libraries? Do we offer a postal loans system? Is there a strategy to move to ebooks for this programme? If so, what is it?
LW / Can the PAT process be further clarified - is it university wide scheme and therefore out side the scope of the course validation? or is it course specific? It has the potential to address most of the weeknesses that we have seen in graduates, however if not delivered properly it removes the emphasis and responsibility for providing industry ready graduates from the course program itself. Basic skills such as confidence on the telephone, communicating clearly with people of all technical abilities, gathering requirements (rather than being briefed) are often harder to teach than a piece of software.
LW / There seems to be an emphasis on linear narrative / character based 'story telling'. Whilst I appreciate that this is a valuable part of multimedia and not to be overlooked, there seems to be a very small part of the course where a learner is taught about the non linear / non narrative aspects (arguably less 'creative' aspects ) of multimedia such as e-commerce, data interpretation, Graphical User Interfaces and Human Interaction. Can the course team justify the joint delivery of modules such as 'concept to prototype' here some learners may wish to prototype using non narrative based approaches such as UML or .
LW / Possibly biased by my chosen route into multi media / new media, but there is an arguable lack of emphasis on 'business skills' and the necessity to be able to able to perform simple skills like reading budgets, quoting (time estimates), basic project management, managing change / external impacts. I don't suggest that the opportunity for learners to produce self satisfying work is removed (as this is one of the best features of education), however if one or two of the projects were effected by real life 'changes' or posed as a scenario with ill defined brief and limiting factors it would give learners the ability to gain skills and an ability to adapt to 'less than perfect' real working scenarios. Addressing a common criticism within the industry.
DM / Articulate please. Need to expand 2.8 p10 to reflect Prog Spec p2/3 and content notes in modules. Also need to align module indicative student workload statements
which use “lectures” repeatedly.
DM / FDL: Prog Hbk p17 suggests whole Award can be accessed through FDL – articulate how given proposed T&L strategy? Is this realistic?
DM / Software: Prog Hbk p17 Given need to work with industry standard resources suggest indicative mapping of software tools to modules would inform re nature of course.
5. Student Support & Guidance
LW / I like the proposal for 'team contracts' on team work projects, but is there provision for this to be enhanced / structured / guided to better replicate a working environment. All graduates we have employed have really struggled with the transition from 'learning environment' to 'work environment' partly because of a lack of understanding of roles, responsibilities and the importance of team work - are the course team intending to guide / teach this? or allow teams to follow their own natural routes and social structures?LW / Can the course team explain in a little more detail how analytical problem solving and self directed research and analysis is taught and tested. From my personal experience those that can do it, do it with ease and excel but those that find it hard can be left without this fundamental ability. Although there are modules where it can be demonstrated and assessed there isn't in (in my opinion) any identifiable point where problem solving and analysis / evaluation techniques are 'taught' to the same degree that you are teaching drawing techniques for example.
DM / Is there an induction programme re Library/Blackboard etc.?
6. Placement
DM / Limited workplace learning (Prog Hbk p17). Does not seem to invite those in employment to engage/widen participationBenchmark statement “Foundation Degree integrate academic and work-based learning through close collaboration between employers and providers”
“work-based learning is an integral part of foundation degrees”
LW / The handbook (6) mentions the limitations of Industry work experience. Whilst I appreciate and agree with the limitations I'd be keen to understand more about the proposals for involving industry and the proposals for industry projects, for limited
CP / Section 3.2 - Why does the location (Multimedia FdA) limit placements? If this is so, is it the right location for the course or the right course for this location? How does this affect employability?
CP / Why do the technologies involved (Games FdA) limit the possibility of work placements? How does this affect employability?
CP / What if the PAT feels the student is not ready to become involved in industry tasks? Does this stop the student completing the course? Student will be “strongly encouraged” to get involved. What if they don’t? (Games FdA)
CP / Section 6 - What is the practical benefit of work placements if they don’t affect course outcomes? Why should I bother doing one?
7. Entry Requirements & Arrangements
DM / What are the entry requirements?8. Programme Management
8.1 Quality Management & Enhancement