Academic Framework for Innovation (AFI)

Review of Module Descriptors

The AFI Module Review Team has now begun to review all modules that are pending approval on Course Builder. Over the coming weeks you will receive feedback on your module descriptors from your AFI Fellow under the headings below.

The next step in the AFI process entails aligning module learning outcomes with award learning outcomes (as approved by Academic Council in April 2009). This process, due to start in early September, cannot commence until all module descriptors have received final approval. We would therefore be very grateful if you could act upon your module feedback as soon as possible after you receive it.

Missing/insufficient information

NO ISSUES TO NOTE UNDER THIS HEADING
description
learning outcomes
level
ECTS credits
indicative content
assessment breakdown
workload breakdown /detail
resources
Other:

Language

NO ISSUES TO NOTE UNDER THIS HEADING
ambiguous words and phrases, e.g., 'exploit'
all acroynms should be fully spelt out when first used
lack of clarity and open to misinterpretation
be consistent with verb form (i.e., delete 'to' at beginning of learning outcomes)
Other:

Description

do not state module aims or objectives indicate some attributes of the intended target audience
include more detail on context and specifics of topic
description is too broad
description is too narrow
needs re-write
Other:

Learning outcomes

NO ISSUES TO NOTE UNDER THIS HEADING
too many learning outcomes
not enough learning outcomes
learning outcomes are too vague
learning outcomes are too broad

choose alternative verb
review use of 'describe', 'understand', 'demonstrate understanding' in learning outcomes relating to theory
more detail on the context of learning outcomes would be useful

learning outcomes are too specific
review use of words which are difficult to assess, e.g., effectively, confidently, be familiar with
more detail on the context of application of learning outcomes would be useful
subject specific links are not apparent

should reference to more specific topics, e.g., matrices, be considered?
consider making reference to specific and relevant theories and concepts of subject matter (e.g., linear algebra, sociology, etc.)

INTRA: professional attributes should reflect competencies at the appropriate module level
Other:

Pre-requisite learning

NO ISSUES TO NOTE UNDER THIS HEADING
check that relevant information is provided
Other:

Indicative content

NO ISSUES TO NOTE UNDER THIS HEADING
try to differentiate between topics and learning activities
add information on learning activities and teaching methodologies
lacks clarity and sufficient detail; include teaching methodologies
content should not be a mirror image of learning outcomes
not specific to module

should be developed further to reflect k nowledge, know-how and skills, and competencies, as appropriate

INTRA: detail needed on context and duration of placement, expected role and support mechanisms
Other:

Assessment

NO ISSUES TO NOTE UNDER THIS HEADING
learning outcomes are not assessed
learning outcome 1 is not assessed
learning outcome 2 is not assessed
learning outcome 3 is not assessed
learning outcome 4 is not assessed
learning outcome 5 is not assessed
learning outcome 6 is not assessed
learning outcome 7 is not assessed
unclear how learning outcomes are demonstrated within the assessment
detailed information showing how the student will demonstrate achievement of learning outcomes is required, including a breakdown of coursework elements and their alignment to learning outcomes
information on coursework type and description is required
more explicit description of coursework type required
more detail needed in coursework breakdown (e.g,, description of coursework elements, including "take-home" assignments)
further details required on how learning outcomes are assessed by proposed assessment types and descriptions
further details on how participation (e.g., at tutorials or seminars) is assessed
large projects should be broken down into sub-tasks where appropriate (i.e., when assessed separately)
assessment date required
indicate whether prsentation/assessment is by individual or by group
indicate how individual's contribution is assessed
Other:

Workload

NO ISSUES TO NOTE UNDER THIS HEADING
1 ECTS credit = 25 hours of work, workload field should reflect this
details are required on type and description of workload
description of workload required
further detail required on type and description of workload
time spent to complete assessment elements should be included
include detail of timing
provide concise information on learning activities taking place during lectures, tutorials, labs, and seminars
indication of what is meant by 'independent learning time' is needed
provide concise information on learning activities students are expected to engage in during 'independent learning time'
provide concise information on learning activities students are expected to engage in outside class time
INTRA: breakdown of workload elements required, e.g., workplacement hours, time to complete different elements of associated coursework
Other:

Constructive alignment

NO ISSUES TO NOTE UNDER THIS HEADING
alignment between learning outcomes and assessment is unclear
credit rating and scope of learning outcomes is mismatched
module level and learning outcomes are / appear to be mismatched, e.g., final year not at level 8
purpose of module and indicative content is mismatched
unclear fit between the learning outcomes, indicative content and description
address the apparent mismatch between learning outcomes and indicative content

learning outcomes may have undersold indicative content
unclear fit between the learning outcomes, indicative content, and assessment
more specific learning outcomes may address this mismatch
more details on assessment may address this apparent mismatch

Other:

Resources

NO ISSUES TO NOTE UNDER THIS HEADING
suggest inclusion of web/online resources
include more recent texts, if available
Other:

Learning Innovation Unit, Dublin City University