Dublin Institute of Technology

Transcription

1 College of Engineering and the Built Environment School of Mechanical and Transport Engineering Department of Mechanical Engineering Dr. Gareth O Donnell MIEI Dublin Institute of Technology Bolton Street Dublin 1 Ireland Tel: Fax: gareth.odonnell@dit.ie 17 th June 2010 Response to MSc in Sustainability, Technology and Innovation Validation Report arising from the validation event dated 30 th April Attached: Revised validation documentation including Programme Document (June 2010) Dear Ms. Cairns, Firstly, I would like to thank both you and your colleagues, and the members of the Validation Panel for their invaluable input to the MSc in Sustainability, Technology and Innovation programme development during the recent validation event. This input has been well received by all involved in the programme, within DIT and at both Purdue University and UPC Barcelona Tech. This input has already triggered many positive developments of this exciting new collaborative programme. Secondly, following from consideration of all the Validation Report (Q3) conditions, recommendations and other observations, the programme development committee can now put forward the following response. Conditions i) The Programme Document must contain all DIT modules that are available to students on this programme and there must be consistency between module codes referred to in the Programme Document, the module descriptors and the Plans of Study. The revised Programme Document now contains all DIT modules that are available to students on the programme, including a new custom-designed Joint Directed Project module. This project module and all the DIT modules are included in section 3 of the revised Programme Document. Also, the programme development committee are confident that all issues of consistency of module codes and titles referred to in the Programme Document have been fully addresses. This relates mainly to consistency between the detail included in section 3 and the detail in appendix D. 1

2 ii) The Panel believes that the transnational aspect of the Joint Directed Project is a key element of the programme, however it considers that the Programme Committee should be mindful of practical considerations in relation to the successful completion of projects by all students. The Programme Document must include a DIT module descriptor for the Joint Directed Project, which is in line with that which is in operation at Purdue University and UPC. This must include a detailed description of the management, supervision and assessment of the project. For the purposes of gaining a DIT award the project mark must be considered at a DIT Module and Award Board. A new custom-designed Joint Directed Project module has been developed which is in-line with that which is in operation at Purdue University and UPC. This module includes a detailed description of the management, supervision and assessment of the project, along with a detailed listing of the learning outcomes for this critically important component of the programme and a description of the role of project supervisors. Consequently, the possibility of ambiguity for either learners or staff involved in this project is minimal. The module descriptor for this project can be found on pages in the revised Programme Document. In addition, it is now specified in the revised Programme Document that, for the purpose of gaining the DIT MSc award, the level of achievement in all modules/courses within each learner s plan of study will be considered by the DIT award board. Therefore, for the purposes of gaining a DIT award the project mark will be considered at a DIT module and award board. The statement relating to this issue can be found on page 22 of the revised Programme Document. The programme development committee are mindful of the practical considerations in relation to the successful completion of projects by all learners and see the role of the major professor, the learner s advisory committee and the project supervisors as being of critical importance regarding project learner support and guidance. All three institutes have considerable experience of delivering similar projects and will work closely to support learners during their engagement with this project. Recommendations iii) The programme should provide for the possibility of an exit award of Postgraduate Diploma for students who leave the programme without completing the MSc award (120 ECTS) and who have obtained at least 60 ECTS from the taught modules. The Programme Committee should give particular consideration to the title of the Postgraduate Diploma that might apply for each student, given the suite of modules the student will have taken. An exit award of Postgraduate Diploma is now included in the programme for learners who wish to leave the programme and have gained at least 60 ECTS from the taught modules. The programme development committee have given particular consideration to the titles of the Postgraduate Diploma that might apply for each learner, given the suite of modules the learner will have successfully completed. The options available to the DIT award board considering a learner for an exit award within this programme are as follows: Postgraduate Diploma in Technology Postgraduate Diploma in Sustainability and Technology Postgraduate Diploma in Sustainability, Technology and Innovation The detail relating to exit awards can be found on page 19, 22 and 23 of the revised Programme Document. 2

3 iv) The Programme Document should include a statement that the DIT s General Assessment Regulations (June 2009) apply to the modules completed at the DIT and should specify in particular as to how compensation might or might not apply. The revised Programme Document now includes a statement that the DIT s General Assessment Regulations (June 2009) apply to the modules completed at the DIT including the new Joint Directed Project. This can be found on page 22 of the revised Programme Document. Also, issues regarding compensation are now explicitly dealt with in the revised Programme Document. Compensation related detail can be found on pages 22 (the last line) and 23. Also, there is a statement within the Joint Directed Project module descriptor which mentions that there is no compensation to or from this module, see page 103 of the revised Programme Document. v) The Programme Document should state that, where minimum thresholds of performance exist for each element of assessment within particular modules, the individual module descriptors will specify where these thresholds apply. The revised Programme Document now includes a statement dealing with the issue of performance thresholds for elements within modules/courses which make up this programme. This statement can be found on page 23 of the revised Programme Document. vi) The entry requirements within the Programme Document should be amended to indicate how the DIT s policy for Recognised Prior Learning may apply to entry/advanced entry/exemptions for this particular programme. The programme development committee recognise that the section relating to Recognised Prior Learning in the original Programme Document presented to the Validation Panel for the validation event were too general and are confident that all issues relating to how the DIT s policy for Recognised Prior Learning may apply to this programme have now been addresses in a programme specific manner. The information relating to Recognised Prior Learning in the revised Programme Document can be found on pages 25 and 29. This information clearly explains that relevant prior learning will be taken into account as part of the selection criteria by the programme admissions committee (page 25) and that the DIT Recognition of Prior Learning policy regarding awarding of exemptions from elements and/or from modules/courses will apply, but only where this does not conflict with the policies of the other institutes or the spirit of learner engagement envisaged by the programme committee (page 29). vii) The Programme Committee should ensure that, in Plan of Study 8, the sequence of delivery of modules TECH 646 and TECH 621 is switched so that students can evolve their project proposal in line with the commencement of the Joint Directed Project. The switch described above has been considered and implemented, see page

4 viii) The Programme Committee should consider, as part of the ongoing development of the programme, the inclusion of modules from other programmes within the DIT as electives within the programme, such as modules from the MSc in Sustainable Development which is now within the College of Engineering and the Built Environment s portfolio of programmes. The Chair of the programme development committee has contacted the Chair of the DIT MSc in Sustainable Development in order to initiate action according to the recommendation above. It is envisaged that some modules from this Sustainable Development programme may be suitable as elective modules. In addition, the programme development committee will continue to develop, through both expansion and refinement, the suite of modules/courses within the general plans of study by considering the programme outcomes and both pre-existing modules/courses within the three institutes and possible new modules/courses. As can be seen in all general plans of study in Appendix D of the revised Programme Document, it is stated that other suitable electives delivered at Purdue University and DIT may be included in a learner s specific plan of study. However, the programme development committee are committed to adherence with all quality assurance processes required for inclusion of such modules/courses. ix) The Programme Committee should consider where modules might include greater emphasis on Standards, particularly in the international context, in terms of awareness, access, use and development, together with the relationship between standardisation and regulation. The programme development committee recognise the importance of a strong emphasis on Standards, particularly in the international context, in terms of awareness, access, use and development, together with the relationship between standardisation and regulation, and have consequently incorporated directly related learning outcomes within the Joint Directed Project. This can be seen on pages 102 and 103. The committee will continue to review the content of existing modules/courses included in the general plans of study, with a specific focus on core modules, to ensure that the appropriate level of learning in these important areas are achieved through involvement in this programme. x) The module descriptor for the Artificial Intelligence module should be reviewed in order to ensure that it is up-to-date in terms of content and appropriate for a Masters level programme. The above recommendation regarding the Introduction to Artificial Intelligence module is being considered by the member of staff currently delivering this module. xi) The Programme Committee should revisit the Irish Cultural Studies modules and consider the appropriateness of these in a Masters level programme. The programme development committee have considered the appropriateness of inclusion of the Irish Cultural Studies modules within this masters level programme and have concluded that they are satisfied that although these modules are generally considered to be at an undergraduate level that the overall cultural learning and experience by a Purdue learner is best complimented by inclusion of these modules. The programme development committee will keep this issue under review and will seek feedback from learners following their engagement in these 4

5 modules. 5

6 xii) The Programme Committee should monitor and continue to develop mechanisms for building a strong learner community among the students of this programme. The programme development committee are committed to building a strong learner community among the learners of this programme and recognise the difficulties of learner isolation which can potentially occur where small numbers of learners are involved in modular programmes such as this. Also, it is envisaged that a number of mechanisms will be used to encourage learners to develop peer relationships with learners from other programmes that are taking the same modules/courses. Other observations The Panel notes that there is a discrepancy in proposed student numbers between the institutions involved and it proposes that this is resolved. The programme development committee have reviewed all documentation relating to this programme and have found that all information presented which relates to learner numbers is correct. The situation regarding learner numbers is as follows: The Atlantis project, to which this programme is a part, specifies that there is financial provision for 24 learners to travel from Europe to the U.S.A. and 24 learners to travel from the U.S.A to Europe over a four year period. There is one U.S. institute (Purdue) and two European institutes (DIT & UPC). Therefore, all 24 U.S. learners will be from Purdue, approximately 12 travelling to DIT and 12 travelling to UPC. This being over a four year period, it is envisaged that there will be an average of 3 Purdue learners travelling to DIT and 3 Purdue learners travelling to UPC per year. Similarly, there should be an average of 6 European learners travelling to Purdue per year, 3 from DIT and 3 from UPC. It should be noted that the project officially started in September 2009 but no learners have yet started in any of the three institutes. In order to make up for this delay in learners starting, it is envisaged that 6 learners may start in DIT during the academic year 10/11, 3 learners during 11/12 and 3 learners during 12/13. The committee welcome any specific information from the validation panel relating to this issue if the panel see an error within the revised validation documentation. The Panel notes that successful completion of the programme will lead to two MSc awards for one programme of study and that as yet the Institute does not have a clear policy in relation to such awards. The programme development committee includes members who are involved in the institute at the highest level and are committed to raising this issue through the appropriate fora. 6

7 Finally, I would like to thank the DIT Quality Assurance office and the Validation Panel for their support of this programme and welcome the Panels recommendation to Academic Council for approval of this programme. Yours sincerely, Dr. Gareth O Donnell (MSc in Sustainability, Technology and Innovation programme development committee Chair) 7