130 likes | 218 Views
This white paper review outlines recommendations for postgraduate curriculum development, including graduate capabilities, academic program models, credit points, and modes of delivery. It discusses faculty responsibilities and implementation plans for enhancing the curriculum. The document addresses the need for market research, flexibility in delivery modes, and the importance of interdisciplinary programs.
E N D
Review & Renewal of Postgraduate Curriculum – White Paper Faculty Forums, Feb-Mar 2010
Purpose of Faculty Forums • To discuss the Recommendations of the White Paper • To outline implementation plans • To follow-up previous faculty forums – see http://www.mq.edu.au/provost/reports/postgrad_review.html
The White Paper • Draws conclusions and makes recommendations • Provides the framework for postgraduate coursework programs • Outlines the governance, principles and process to be used by the faculties to implement the White Paper
Bases for development of P/G Curriculum • Graduate Capabilities – programs to develop cognitive capabilities and interpersonal and personal dispositions • Integrated Ethics – scaffolded approach to integrate development through certificates, diplomas and masters degrees
Academic Program Models • Terminology • Graduate: to be applied the certificates & diplomas (undergraduate units of 3 credit point value) • Postgraduate: to be applied to certificates , diplomas and masters units of 4 credit point value)
Academic Program Models • Structure and Shape • Duration of qualification (i.e. alignment with Bologna) is not the primary criterion • Capabilities drive content and duration • Standardisation based on workload (student and staff) for credit points • Retain nested qualification but streamline re-application process
Academic Program Models • Credit Points • 4 credit point unit is appropriate for P/G units • Apply the current U/G model – 3 hours of student learning is required for 1 credit point, i.e. a 4 credit point P/G unit will require 12 hours per week
Academic Program Models • Named Vs Generic Degrees • Named degrees for ‘depth’ programs i.e. professional degrees • Generic degrees for ‘breadth’ • Arts and Science to review their other named degrees to limit their number & shift to generic degree • Need for market research to develop new multi-disciplinary ‘breadth’ P/G programs
Academic Program Models • Modes of Delivery Flexibility in modes of delivery is central to meeting the needs of the P/G student: • Flexible delivery, incl packaging, timing and use of technology • Use of COE and AccessMQ • Use of OUA
Articulation • Entry - Flexibility re entry criteria (interviews, referee reports, U/G student record, work experience, portfolio) • Entry - Consider the need for qualifying units • Articulation to HDR - Equivalence to Honours with 25% research project
Implementation: Departments/Disciplines responsible for: • Planning new units and programs • Review each program/unit every 3 years • Developing ‘lab-based’ or ‘lecture-based’ shell units • Rationalise units and programs (recommend to FSQC) • Show cause why units or programs with few students should be continued
Implementation: Faculties responsible for: • Working with central Marketing to clarify roles • Consider establishing Faculty Graduate Schools (clearly delineating central & dept’l responsibilities) • Work with AccessMQ and COE to provide a range of lifelong learning opportunities • Review provision of transition programs • Work with CME to provide academic literacy • Develop means of early identification of language & academic literacy needs • Identify opportunities for new interdisciplinary units & programs • FSQCs to develop process for reduction of units and programs
Conclusion • Implementation 1 Jan 2012 • See White Paper on Provost’s Website: http://www.mq.edu.au/provost/reports/docs/WhitepaperFinal.doc • Any Questions?