Programmatic Review 2013-2014 Phase 2 Programmes · Academic Council Meeting No. 138 June 20th 2014...

Academic Council Meeting No. 138 June 20th 2014 (AC:DOC:138:13:01)

1

Programmatic Review 2013-2014

Phase 2 – Programmes

School: Informatics and Creative Arts Department: Section of Creative Media

Programme Title NFQ Level

Award Type Award Class

ECTS Credits

Exit Award

Parent Programme

Approval Status

Bachelor of Arts(Hons) in Communications in Creative Multimedia

8 Honours Bachelor Degree Major 60 N Accredited for 5 years

Bachelor of Arts (Hons) in Video and Film Production


Bachelor of Science (Hons) in Interactive Applications Design and Development


Bachelor of Science in Interactive Applications Design and Development

7 Ordinary Bachelor Degree Major 180 Y Bachelor of Science (Hons) in Interactive Applications Design and Development

Accredited for 5 years

Higher Certificate in Interactive Applications Design and Development

6 Higher Certificate Major 120 Y Bachelor of Science (Hons) in Interactive Applications Design and Development

Accredited for 5 years

Report of Validation Panel Page 1/8

Report of Programme Validation Panel

Date: 11th March 2014

Named Award: Bachelor of Science (Honours) Programme Title(s): Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Communications in Creative

Multimedia Exit Award(s): Not applicable Award Type: Honours Bachelor Degree Award Class: Major NFQ Level: 8 ECTS / ACCS Credits: 60 First Intake: 20

Panel Members

Mr. Michael Hannon Chair Registrar, Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology (GMIT)

Professor Marie Redmond Academic Centre for Creative Technologies, Trinity College Dublin

Dr. Brian Vaughan Academic Digital Media Centre, DIT Mr. Donal Taylor Black Academic Head of Department Film and Media IADT Mr. Kevin Cummins Industry Television Executive Producer/Director,

RTE Mr. Pat McCormick Secretary to

Panel Head of Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, DkIT

Programme Development Team

Glen Doyle Kenneth Sloane Dr Bride Mallon Donal Beecher JJ Quinlan Sarah McCann Emma Hogan Caroline O’Sullivan Kieran Nolan Dr. Matt Green


1 Introduction The following report to Academic Council is a validation panel report from an expert panel of assessors on a proposal from the Section of Creative Media in the School of Informatics and Creative Arts at Dundalk Institute of Technology to design the following programme(s): Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Communications in Creative Multimedia

The evaluators would like to thank the members of the development team for engaging generously and openly with the review process. The report is divided into the following sections: Background to Proposed Programme General Findings of the Validation Panel Programme-Level Findings Module-Level Findings

2 Background to Proposed Programme See programme submission for more detailed information.

3 General Findings of the Validation Panel The Panel found the facilities to be excellent. The panel congratulates the programme development team on the significant effort evident in the preparation of the documentation and in the level of engagement of the team in its discussions with the Panel. The panel did, however, feel that the documentation was too broad and should have been more focused on the specific changes to the programme itself and the rationale for those changes. Where the programme presented is an add-on to another programme, as in this case, oversight of the originating programme should be provided even if that programme is not being presented for re-validation. Having considered the documentation provided and discussed it with the programme development team, the validation panel recommends the following: Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Communications in Creative Multimedia

Accredited for the next five academic years or until the next programmatic review, whichever occurs sooner

Accredited subject to conditions and/or recommendations X Re-designed and re-submitted to the same validation panel after additional developmental work

Not Accredited Approval is conditional on the submission of a revised programme document that takes account of the conditions and recommendations outlined below and a response document describing the actions of the Department to address the conditions and recommendations made by the programme validation panel. In this report, the term Condition is used to indicate


an action or amendment which in the view of the validation panel must be undertaken prior to the commencement of the programme. Conditions are mandatory if the programme is to be approved. The term Recommendation indicates an item to which the Programme Board should give serious consideration for implementation at an early stage and which should be the subject of on-going monitoring.

4 Programme-Level Findings This section of the report addresses the following programme level considerations: Demand Award Institute strategy alignment Entry requirements Access, transfer and progression Standards and Outcomes Programme structure Teaching and Learning Strategies Assessment Strategy Resource requirements Quality Assurance.

4.1 Demand

Validation Criterion: Is there a convincing need for the programme and has evidence been provided to support it?

Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.2 Award

Validation Criterion: Is the level and type of the award appropriate? Overall Finding: Yes

Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.


4.3 Institute Strategy Alignment

Validation Criterion: Is the proposed programme aligned to the Institute’s strategy and are the strategic themes of entrepreneurship, sustainability and internationalisation embedded in the proposed programme as appropriate?

Overall Finding: Yes. The programme is well aligned especially with entrepreneurship


4.4 Entry Requirements

Validation Criterion: Are the entry requirements for the proposed programme clear and appropriate?

Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None.

Recommendation(s): The entry requirements were not sufficiently clearly stated. Provide clearer criteria for

applicants other than those coming directly from the Institute’s feeder programmes.

4.5 Access, Transfer and Progression

Validation Criterion: Does the proposed programme incorporate the procedures for access, transfer and progression that have been established by the NQAI and does it accommodate a variety of access and entry requirements?

Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): Where students initially have not met the entry threshold but then gain relevant work

experience a mechanism to recognise this experience for entry should be developed. This may have broader application across the Institute.


4.6 Standards and Outcomes

Validation Criterion: Does the proposed programme meet the required award standards for programmes at the proposed NFQ level (i.e. conform to QQI Award Standards)? For parent award? For exit award (if applicable)?

Overall Finding: Yes The awards standards requirements for programmes on the NFQ Framework can be found at http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.7 Programme Structure

Validation Criterion: Is the programme structure logical and well designed and can the stated proposed programme outcomes in terms of employment skills and career opportunities be met by this programme?


4.8 Teaching and Learning Strategies

Validation Criterion: Have appropriate teaching and learning strategies been provided for the proposed programme?


http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm


4.9 Assessment Strategies

Validation Criterion:

Have appropriate programme assessment strategies been provided for the proposed programme (as outlined in the QQI/HETAC Assessment and Guidelines, 2009)?

Overall Finding: Yes Assessment strategies are required in line with HETAC’s Assessment and Standards and should form a substantial part of the documentation to be considered by the programme validation panel. See (HETAC (2009) Assessment and Standards, Section 4.6.1, page 33). Accordingly the assessment strategy should address the following (See (HETAC (2009) Assessment and Standards, Section 2.2.5, page 13) : Description and Rationale for the choice of assessment tasks, criteria and procedures. This

should address fairness and consistency, specifically their validity, reliability and authenticity;

Describe any special regulations; Regulate, build upon and integrate the module assessment strategies; Provide contingent strategy for cases where learners claim exemption from modules,

including recognition of prior learning; Ensure the programme’s continuous assessment workload is appropriately balanced; Relate to the teaching and learning strategy; Demonstrate how grading criteria will be developed to relate to the Institutional grading

system. The Institute resource entitled Assessment and Learning: A Policy for Dundalk Institute of Technology (Nov 2010) (https://www.dkit.ie/celt/documents-and-policies/assessment-and-learning-guidelines-dundalk-institute-technology) should also be consulted. Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.10 Resource Requirements


Does the Institute possess the resources and facilities necessary to deliver the proposed programme?


Recommendation(s): None.


4.11 Quality Assurance


Does the proposed programme demonstrate how the Institute’s quality assurance procedures have been applied and that satisfactory procedures exist for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of programmes?

Overall Finding: Yes The Institute’s Quality Assurance Procedures are published in the Academic Quality Assurance Manual available at: https://www.dkit.ie/registrar/policies/academic-quality-manual and include approved procedures for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of Programmes. Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): The process for programme review is too granular, providing excessive detail and

documentation which makes oversight difficult. More focused reports concentrating on the significant changes to the programme and the modules would greatly aid this process.


4.12 Module-Level Findings Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): Module Research Methods – the assessment components should be integrated into the

overall project submission.

Entrepreneurship for Creative industries – This module could be more focused on creativity and the innovative process rather than business processes / practice.

Advanced Web Applications. The workload in this module should be reviewed in light of

the ECTS credits for the module. The panel has concerns that the content may be too broad. The reading list and indicative content should be reviewed to provide a clearer description of the detail of the module.

https://www.dkit.ie/registrar/policies/academic-quality-manual





Have appropriate module assessment strategies been included in the proposed programme?


4.14 Other Findings Condition(s) None. Recommendation(s): The process involved an excessive amount of documentation and effort for minor changes.

The amount and detail of documentation produced for programmatic review should be reassessed.

The panel has concerns about the removal or non-revalidation of the Level 7 programme without having an approved Level 8 ready to replace it. The rationale for this decision was unclear and seems to be a very high risk for the Institute.

Validation Panel Report Approved By: Signed:

_____________________________________________ Mr. Michael Hannon, Chairperson.

Date: 07-04-2014

Response to Report of Validation Panel Page 1/10

Response to the Report of the Programme Validation Panel


Named Award: Bachelor of Arts (Honours) Programme Title(s): Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Communications in Creative

Multimedia Exit Award(s): Not applicable Award Type: Honours Bachelor Degree Award Class: Major NFQ Level: 8 ECTS / ACCS Credits: 60 First Intake: 20

Panel Members



Dr. Brian Vaughan Academic Digital Media Centre, DIT Mr. Donal Taylor Black Academic Head of Department Film and Media IADT Mr. Kevin Cummins Industry Television Executive Producer/Director,

RTE Mr. Pat McCormick Secretary to

Panel Head of Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, DkIT


Glen Doyle Kenneth Sloane Dr Bride Mallon Donal Beecher JJ Quinlan Sarah McCann Emma Hogan Caroline O’Sullivan Kieran Nolan Dr. Matt Green


1 Introduction The following report to Academic Council is a validation panel report from an expert panel of assessors on a proposal from the Section of Creative Media in the School of Informatics and Creative Arts at Dundalk Institute of Technology to design the following programme(s): Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Communications in Creative Multimedia



3 General Findings of the Validation Panel The Panel found the facilities to be excellent. The panel congratulates the programme development team on the significant effort evident in the preparation of the documentation and in the level of engagement of the team in its discussions with the Panel. The panel did, however, feel that the documentation was too broad and should have been more focused on the specific changes to the programme itself and the rationale for those changes. RESPONSE The Section of Creative Media agree with the findings of the panel regarding the broadness of the documentation presented. In the production of this documentation, the Section followed the guidelines as per the DKIT Handbook for Programmatic Review, produced by the Registrar’s Office and the Centre for Learning & Teaching. Where the programme presented is an add-on to another programme, as in this case, oversight of the originating programme should be provided even if that programme is not being presented for re-validation. RESPONSE A full review of the Level 7 BA in Communications in Creative Multimedia was provided in the Programmatic Review documentation. In addition, a full Self Evaluation Report of the Section of Creative Media was also provided, which included further details on this programme. The Section of Creative Media did place a request with the Registrar’s Office that the Level 7 BA in Communications in Creative Multimedia was listed on the agenda for the panel for discussion (although it was not to be revalidated), along side the add-on BA (Hons)in Communications in Creative Multimedia (to be revalidated), but this request was not granted.


Having considered the documentation provided and discussed it with the programme development team, the validation panel recommends the following: Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Communications in Creative Multimedia



Not Accredited Approval is conditional on the submission of a revised programme document that takes account of the conditions and recommendations outlined below and a response document describing the actions of the Department to address the conditions and recommendations made by the programme validation panel. In this report, the term Condition is used to indicate an action or amendment which in the view of the validation panel must be undertaken prior to the commencement of the programme. Conditions are mandatory if the programme is to be approved. The term Recommendation indicates an item to which the Programme Board should give serious consideration for implementation at an early stage and which should be the subject of on-going monitoring.


4.1 Demand





4.2 Award





Overall Finding: Yes. The programme is well aligned especially with entrepreneurship








RESPONSE

This Section has been updated in the document to also read: Such applicants apply via an Advanced Entry Procedure and are assessed as per the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) policy of the Institute, to include RPCL (Recognition of Prior Certified Learning) and RPEL (Recognition of Prior Experiental Learning).





RESPONSE

Such applicants would also apply via an Advanced Entry Procedure and would be assessed as per the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) policy of the Institute, to include RPCL (Recognition of Prior Certified Learning) and RPEL (Recognition of Prior Experiental Learning).



Overall Finding: Yes The awards standards requirements for programmes on the NFQ Framework can be found at http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm Condition(s): None.















Describe any special regulations;


Regulate, build upon and integrate the module assessment strategies; Provide contingent strategy for cases where learners claim exemption from modules,











Overall Finding: Yes The Institute’s Quality Assurance Procedures are published in the Academic Quality Assurance Manual available at: https://www.dkit.ie/registrar/policies/academic-quality-manual and include approved procedures for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of Programmes. Condition(s): None.




Recommendation(s): The process for programme review is too granular, providing excessive detail and

documentation which makes oversight difficult. More focused reports concentrating on the significant changes to the programme and the modules would greatly aid this process.

RESPONSE

The Section of Creative Media agree with the findings of the panel regarding the broadness of the documentation presented. In the production of this documentation, the Section followed the guidelines as per the DKIT Handbook for Programmatic Review, produced by the Registrar’s Office and the Centre for Learning & Teaching. Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.12 Module-Level Findings Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): Module Research Methods – the assessment components should be integrated into the

overall project submission.

Entrepreneurship for Creative industries – This module could be more focused on creativity and the innovative process rather than business processes / practice.

Advanced Web Applications. The workload in this module should be reviewed in light of

the ECTS credits for the module. The panel has concerns that the content may be too broad. The reading list and indicative content should be reviewed to provide a clearer description of the detail of the module.

RESPONSE

Module Research Methods - we consider this recommendation refers to the inclusion of a

class test on research methods, in addition to the delivery of the research-based dissertation (their overall project submission), meaning that the test assessment is additional to the main deliverable: the dissertation. The class test has been removed from this module on this recommendation from the panel.

The recommendation regarding Entrepreneurship for Creative industries has been taken on board and the module has been updated to follow a practice-based Design


Thinking approach to new venture creation. The module champions innovation and creativity together with a recognition of student competencies and prior-learning and how to apply these to entrepreneurship.

Advanced Web Applications - the workload has been reviewed as per the panel’s recommendation. However, as this is an add-on to an existing Level 7 degree, the Programme Board considers that it would be remiss not to allow the students some exporsure to Mobile Applications as part of their award year module, alongside other web applications. Although the content does read in a broad fashion, it is important to note that it is delivered Level 8 students and is designed so that those who choose this elective gain much-needed exposure to both mobile and web applications to benefit them in their future careers with changing technologies. The reading list has also been updated provide a clearer description of the detail of the module, as recommended by the panel.








RESPONSE

The Section of Creative Media agree with the findings of the panel regarding the broadness of the documentation presented. In the production of this documentation, the Section followed the guidelines as per the DKIT Handbook for Programmatic Review, produced by the Registrar’s Office and the Centre for Learning & Teaching.


The Section of Creative Media was involved in a parallel process which included the revalidating of existing programmes in one process and the validation of new programmes throughout a second process. The timing and the staging of the various panels for this parallel process unfortunately did not allow for the validation of the new programmes before the revalidation of the exisiting programmes, but the Section of Creative Media is delighted to report that all new programmes have been subsequently validated subject to some conditions/recommendations.

Response Response Report Approved By: Signed:

Gerard (Bob) McKiernan

_____________________________________________ Dr Gerard Bob McKiernan, Head of School of Informatics and Creative Arts.

Date: 6th June 2014 Signed:

_____________________________________________ Mr. Michael Hannon, Chairperson.

Date: 6th June 2014




Named Award: Bachelor of Science (Honours) Programme Title(s): Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Video and Film Production Exit Award(s): Not applicable Award Type: Honours Bachelor Degree Award Class: Major NFQ Level: 8 ECTS / ACCS Credits: 60 First Intake: 20

Panel Members



Dr. Brian Vaughan Academic Digital Media Centre, Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT)

Mr. Donal Taylor Black Academic Head of Department of Film and Media, Dún Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology (IADT)

Mr. Kevin Cummins Industry Television Executive Producer/Director, RTE

Mr. Pat McCormick Secretary to Panel

Head of Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Dundalk Institute of Technology (DkIT)


Glen Doyle Caroline O’Sullivan Yvonne Igoe Donal Beecher Dr. Zelie Asava Sarah McCann Emma Hogan Dr Eamon Crudden Kenneth Sloane Shirley Donegan JJ Quinlan Kieran Nolan Dr Bride Mallon Dr. Matt Green


1 Introduction The following report to Academic Council is a validation panel report from an expert panel of assessors on a proposal from the Section of Creative Media in the School of Informatics and Creative Arts at Dundalk Institute of Technology to design the following programme(s): Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Video and Film Production



3 General Findings of the Validation Panel The Panel found the facilities to be excellent. The panel congratulates the programme development team on the significant effort evident in the preparation of the documentation and in the level of engagement of the team in its discussions with the Panel. The panel did, however, feel that the documentation was too broad and should have been more focused on the specific changes to the programme itself and the rationale for those changes. Where the programme presented is an add-on to another programme, as in this case, oversight of the originating programme should be provided even if that programme is not being presented for re-validation. The panel considered the request to change to name of the programme and consider the current name sufficient. Having considered the documentation provided and discussed it with the programme development team, the validation panel recommends the following: Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Video and Film Production



Not Accredited


Approval is conditional on the submission of a revised programme document that takes account of the conditions and recommendations outlined below and a response document describing the actions of the Department to address the conditions and recommendations made by the programme validation panel. In this report, the term Condition is used to indicate an action or amendment which in the view of the validation panel must be undertaken prior to the commencement of the programme. Conditions are mandatory if the programme is to be approved. The term Recommendation indicates an item to which the Programme Board should give serious consideration for implementation at an early stage and which should be the subject of on-going monitoring.


4.1 Demand



4.2 Award


Condition(s): None.





Overall Finding: Yes. The panel particularly commends the entrepreneurship module






applicants other than those coming directly from the Institute’s feeder programmes..





Recommendation(s): Where students initially have not met the entry threshold but then gain relevant work




Overall Finding: Yes The awards standards requirements for programmes on the NFQ Framework can be found at http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.



Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): The panel felt that strong consideration should be given to delivering the Production

Design and the Directing modules in the first semester.



Overall Finding: Yes




















Overall Finding: Yes The Institute’s Quality Assurance Procedures are published in the Academic Quality Assurance Manual available at: https://www.dkit.ie/registrar/policies/academic-quality-manual and include approved procedures for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of Programmes. Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.12 Module-Level Findings Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.









Validation Panel Report Approved By: Signed:

_______________________________________ Mr. Michael Hannon, Chairperson.

Date: 07-04-2014




Named Award: Bachelor of Science (Honours) Programme Title(s): Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Video and Film Production Exit Award(s): Not applicable Award Type: Honours Bachelor Degree Award Class: Major NFQ Level: 8 ECTS / ACCS Credits: 60 First Intake: 20

Panel Members



Dr. Brian Vaughan Academic Digital Media Centre, Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT)

Mr. Donal Taylor Black Academic Head of Department of Film and Media, Dún Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology (IADT)

Mr. Kevin Cummins Industry Television Executive Producer/Director, RTE

Mr. Pat McCormick Secretary to Panel

Head of Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Dundalk Institute of Technology (DkIT)


Glen Doyle Caroline O’Sullivan Yvonne Igoe Donal Beecher Dr. Zelie Asava Sarah McCann Emma Hogan Dr Eamon Crudden Kenneth Sloane Shirley Donegan JJ Quinlan Kieran Nolan Dr Bride Mallon Dr. Matt Green


1 Introduction The following report to Academic Council is a validation panel report from an expert panel of assessors on a proposal from the Section of Creative Media in the School of Informatics and Creative Arts at Dundalk Institute of Technology to design the following programme(s): Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Video and Film Production



3 General Findings of the Validation Panel The Panel found the facilities to be excellent. The panel congratulates the programme development team on the significant effort evident in the preparation of the documentation and in the level of engagement of the team in its discussions with the Panel. The panel did, however, feel that the documentation was too broad and should have been more focused on the specific changes to the programme itself and the rationale for those changes. RESPONSE The Section of Creative Media agree with the findings of the panel regarding the broadness of the documentation presented. In the production of this documentation, the Section followed the guidelines as per the DKIT Handbook for Programmatic Review, produced by the Registrar’s Office and the Centre for Learning & Teaching. Where the programme presented is an add-on to another programme, as in this case, oversight of the originating programme should be provided even if that programme is not being presented for re-validation. RESPONSE A full review of the Level 7 BA in Video & Film Production was provided in the Programmatic Review documentation. In addition, a full Self Evaluation Report of the Section of Creative Media was also provided, which included further details on this programme. The Section of Creative Media did place a request with the Registrar’s Office that the Level 7 BA in Video & Film Production was listed on the agenda for the panel for discussion (although it was not to be revalidated), alongside the add-on BA (Hons) in Video & Film Production (to be revalidated), but this request was not granted.


The panel considered the request to change to name of the programme and consider the current name sufficient. Having considered the documentation provided and discussed it with the programme development team, the validation panel recommends the following: Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Video and Film Production



Not Accredited Approval is conditional on the submission of a revised programme document that takes account of the conditions and recommendations outlined below and a response document describing the actions of the Department to address the conditions and recommendations made by the programme validation panel. In this report, the term Condition is used to indicate an action or amendment which in the view of the validation panel must be undertaken prior to the commencement of the programme. Conditions are mandatory if the programme is to be approved. The term Recommendation indicates an item to which the Programme Board should give serious consideration for implementation at an early stage and which should be the subject of on-going monitoring.


4.1 Demand





4.2 Award





Overall Finding: Yes. The panel particularly commends the entrepreneurship module








RESPONSE This Section has been updated in the document to also read: Such applicants apply via an Advanced Entry Procedure and are assessed as per the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) policy of the Institute, to include RPCL (Recognition of Prior Certified Learning) and RPEL (Recognition of Prior Experiental Learning).





RESPONSE Such applicants would also apply via an Advanced Entry Procedure and would be assessed as per the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) policy of the Institute, to include RPCL (Recognition of Prior Certified Learning) and RPEL (Recognition of Prior Experiental Learning).



Overall Finding: Yes The awards standards requirements for programmes on the NFQ Framework can be found at http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm Condition(s): None.






Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): The panel felt that strong consideration should be given to delivering the Production

Design and the Directing modules in the first semester. RESPONSE The Programme Board have considered the above recommendation. Due to the placement of the Work Placement module in the latter 6 weeks of Semester 1, there is limited time to deliver modules in the 1st half of the term. Feedback from both students and companies regarding our Work Placement module is that the Production Management skills the students learn in the Production Management module before going on work placement are key. Thus, it is considered that this module should remain in the 1st semester. In addition, as the Production Design and Directing modules are designed to be delivered in intensive blocked formats, they are placed at the start of Semester 2 to allow for their integration into the final practical element of the 15ECTS Practice-Based Research module, which usually includes the creation of a substantial piece of Creative Practice, e.g., 15-30min fiction film/documentary. These skills are considered to be key in the preparation of the students for the creation of this Creative Practice.






















4.12 Module-Level Findings Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.





4.14 Other Findings Condition(s) None.


Recommendation(s): The process involved an excessive amount of documentation and effort for minor changes.



RESPONSE The Section of Creative Media agree with the findings of the panel regarding the broadness of the documentation presented. In the production of this documentation, the Section followed the guidelines as per the DKIT Handbook for Programmatic Review, produced by the Registrar’s Office and the Centre for Learning & Teaching.

The Section of Creative Media was involved in a parallel process which included the revalidating of existing programmes in one process and the validation of new programmes throughout a second process. The timing and the staging of the various panels for this parallel process unfortunately did not allow for the validation of the new programmes before the revalidation of the exisiting programmes, but the Section of Creative Media is delighted to report that all new programmes have been subsequently validated subject to some conditions/recommendations. Validation Panel Report Approved By: Signed:

Gerard (Bob) McKiernan

_____________________________________________ Dr Gerard Bob McKiernan, Head of School of Informatics and Creative Arts.


_______________________________________ Mr. Michael Hannon, Chairperson.

Date: 6th June 2014




Named Award: Bachelor of Science (Honours) Programme Title(s): Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Interactive Applications Design

and Development Exit Award(s): Bachelor of Science in Interactive Applications Design and

Development Higher Certificate in Science in Interactive Applications Design and Development

Award Type: Honours Bachelor Degree Award Class: Major NFQ Level: 8 ECTS / ACCS Credits: 240, 180, 120 First Intake: 20

Panel Members


Professor Marie Redmond Academic Centre for Creative Technologies, Trinity College Dublin (TCD)

Ms Sue Reardon Academic Programme Co-ordinator, IADT Mr. Donal Taylor Black Academic Head of Dept Film and Media IADT Mr Simon Cowan Industry Prometric Mr. Pat McCormick Secretary to

Panel Head of Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Dundalk Institute of Technology (DkIT).


Sarah McCann Peter Morris David O’Keefe Peter Gosling Peadar Grane Marcos Dias Audrey Nugent Glen Doyle Linn Leay Frances Byrne Philip McGuinness Paula Keane N Flanders Fiachra O’Cuinneagain Kieran Nolan Catherine Staunton JJ Quinlan Matt Green Emma Hogan Dr Bride Mallon


1 Introduction The following report to Academic Council is a validation panel report from an expert panel of assessors on a proposal from the Section of Creative Media in the School of Informatics and Creative Arts at Dundalk Institute of Technology to design the following programme(s): Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Interactive Applications Design and Development Bachelor of Science in Interactive Applications Design and Development Higher Certificate in Science in Interactive Applications Design and Development



3 General Findings of the Validation Panel The Panel found the facilities to be excellent. The panel congratulates the programme development team on the significant effort evident in the preparation of the documentation and in the level of engagement of the team in its discussions with the Panel. The Panel particularly commends the inclusion of a full semester work placement. The changes to the programme were in the main driven by restructuring for internal reasons and overall changes in the main were minor. Having considered the documentation provided and discussed it with the programme development team, the validation panel recommends the following: Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Interactive Applications Design and Development



Not Accredited





Not Accredited Higher Certificate in Science in Interactive Applications Design and Development



Not Accredited Note: Conditions and recommendations described for the parent award apply equally for the

exit award(s) as appropriate. Approval is conditional on the submission of a revised programme document that takes account of the conditions and recommendations outlined below and a response document describing the actions of the Department to address the conditions and recommendations made by the programme validation panel. In this report, the term Condition is used to indicate an action or amendment which in the view of the validation panel must be undertaken prior to the commencement of the programme. Conditions are mandatory if the programme is to be approved. The term Recommendation indicates an item to which the Programme Board should give serious consideration for implementation at an early stage and which should be the subject of on-going monitoring.



4.1 Demand


Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): The panel has concerns that the minimum entry requirement of 300 leaving certificate

points may be overly restrictive and that his policy should be reconsidered, particularly in light of the limited demand from leaving certificate students to date..

4.2 Award










Recommendation(s): The panel has concerns that the minimum entry requirement of 300 leaving certificate

points may be overly restrictive and that his policy should be reconsidered, particularly in light of the limited demand from leaving certificate students to date.



Overall Finding: Yes. The panel does not see that here are many options for transfer externally, there may be internal opportunities.




Overall Finding: Yes The awards standards requirements for programmes on the NFQ Framework can be found at http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm






Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): The panel has concerns that the constraints of the programme design structure may have

a negative impact particularly where co-delivery and / or shared modules are involved. Where modules are separate in one programme they should not be merged in another to satisfy structural requirements. Likewise modules should not be separated in order to satisfy the same requirements.







Overall Finding: Yes Assessment strategies are required in line with HETAC’s Assessment and Standards and should form a substantial part of the documentation to be considered by the programme


validation panel. See (HETAC (2009) Assessment and Standards, Section 4.6.1, page 33). Accordingly the assessment strategy should address the following (See (HETAC (2009) Assessment and Standards, Section 2.2.5, page 13) : Description and Rationale for the choice of assessment tasks, criteria and procedures. This














The Institute’s Quality Assurance Procedures are published in the Academic Quality Assurance Manual available at: https://www.dkit.ie/registrar/policies/academic-quality-manual and include approved procedures for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of Programmes. Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.12 Module-Level Findings Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): Introduction to Web Development & Web Animation Programming – consider renaming to

better reflect the content of the module – this module is one where the panel felt that combining two modules from another programme to make one on this could be problematic.

Creativity and Innovation – Consider introducing a more entrepreneurial focus. Authoring for web – again this module forms 50% of a 10 credit module elsewhere when

co-delivered. Correct the contact hours. Maintain a watching brief to ensure currency of content.

Web Frameworks – Consider expanding the coverage to include languages such as dot net

(.NET) as well as Java. Work Placement – inclusion of a feedback matrix from the academic side to the industry

partner should be considered. An ongoing monitoring of the perceived benefits and drawbacks of the work placement from both perspectives should be developed.

Research Methods – Consideration should be given to integrating this with the Team

Project module.





Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): The programme team should seek to use integrated assessments where appropriate.

4.14 Other Findings Condition(s) None. Recommendation(s): None. Validation Panel Report Approved By: Signed:

___________________________________________ Mr. Michael Hannon, Chairperson.

Date: 07-04-2014




Named Award: Bachelor of Science (Honours) Programme Title(s): Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Interactive Applications Design

and Development Exit Award(s): Bachelor of Science in Interactive Applications Design and

Development Higher Certificate in Science in Interactive Applications Design and Development

Award Type: Honours Bachelor Degree Award Class: Major NFQ Level: 8, 7, 6 ECTS / ACCS Credits: 240, 180, 120 First Intake: 20

Panel Members


Professor Marie Redmond Academic Centre for Creative Technologies, Trinity College Dublin (TCD)

Ms Sue Reardon Academic Programme Co-ordinator, IADT Mr. Donal Taylor Black Academic Head of Dept Film and Media IADT Mr Simon Cowan Industry Prometric Mr. Pat McCormick Secretary to

Panel Head of Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Dundalk Institute of Technology (DkIT).


Sarah McCann Peter Morris David O’Keefe Peter Gosling Peadar Grane Marcos Dias Audrey Nugent Glen Doyle Linn Leay Frances Byrne Philip McGuinness Paula Keane N Flanders Fiachra O’Cuinneagain Kieran Nolan Catherine Staunton JJ Quinlan Matt Green Emma Hogan Dr Bride Mallon


1 Introduction The following report to Academic Council is a validation panel report from an expert panel of assessors on a proposal from the Section of Creative Media in the School of Informatics and Creative Arts at Dundalk Institute of Technology to design the following programme(s): Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Interactive Applications Design and Development Bachelor of Science in Interactive Applications Design and Development Higher Certificate in Science in Interactive Applications Design and Development



3 General Findings of the Validation Panel The Panel found the facilities to be excellent. The panel congratulates the programme development team on the significant effort evident in the preparation of the documentation and in the level of engagement of the team in its discussions with the Panel. The Panel particularly commends the inclusion of a full semester work placement. The changes to the programme were in the main driven by restructuring for internal reasons and overall changes in the main were minor. Having considered the documentation provided and discussed it with the programme development team, the validation panel recommends the following: Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Interactive Applications Design and Development



Not Accredited





Not Accredited Higher Certificate in Science in Interactive Applications Design and Development



Not Accredited Note: Conditions and recommendations described for the parent award apply equally for the

exit award(s) as appropriate. Approval is conditional on the submission of a revised programme document that takes account of the conditions and recommendations outlined below and a response document describing the actions of the Department to address the conditions and recommendations made by the programme validation panel. In this report, the term Condition is used to indicate an action or amendment which in the view of the validation panel must be undertaken prior to the commencement of the programme. Conditions are mandatory if the programme is to be approved. The term Recommendation indicates an item to which the Programme Board should give serious consideration for implementation at an early stage and which should be the subject of on-going monitoring.



4.1 Demand


Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): The panel has concerns that the minimum entry requirement of 300 leaving certificate


RESPONSE

These are the standard entry requirements for a Level 8 programme in Dundalk Institute of Technology and cannot be changed at programme level.

4.2 Award










Recommendation(s): The panel has concerns that the minimum entry requirement of 300 leaving certificate


RESPONSE

These are the standard entry requirements for a Level 8 programme in Dundalk Institute of Technology and cannot be changed at programme level.



Overall Finding: Yes. The panel does not see that here are many options for transfer externally, there may be internal opportunities.






The awards standards requirements for programmes on the NFQ Framework can be found at http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.



Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): The panel has concerns that the constraints of the programme design structure may have

a negative impact particularly where co-delivery and / or shared modules are involved. Where modules are separate in one programme they should not be merged in another to satisfy structural requirements. Likewise modules should not be separated in order to satisfy the same requirements.

RESPONSE

There are always challenges when delivering a programmes across two departments. In addition, the structure of the programme is also somewhat dictated by Academic Council’s ruling that following the 2013 Programmatic Review, all programmes leading to major awards shall have a maximum of 10 modules per stage.

However, it is important to note that the examinable entities in co-delivered modules are the same, as are the module learning outcomes.

























4.12 Module-Level Findings Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s):

1. Introduction to Web Development & Web Animation Programming – consider renaming to better reflect the content of the module – this module is one where the panel felt that combining two modules from another programme to make one on this could be problematic.

2. Creativity and Innovation – Consider introducing a more entrepreneurial focus.

3. Authoring for web – again this module forms 50% of a 10 credit module elsewhere

when co-delivered. Correct the contact hours. Maintain a watching brief to ensure currency of content.

4. Web Frameworks – Consider expanding the coverage to include languages such as dot

net (.NET) as well as Java.

5. Work Placement – inclusion of a feedback matrix from the academic side to the industry partner should be considered. An ongoing monitoring of the perceived benefits and drawbacks of the work placement from both perspectives should be developed.


6. Research Methods – Consideration should be given to integrating this with the Team

Project module.

RESPONSE

1. The module has been renamed as Introduction to Web Technologies. Please also see the above response to Section 4.7 re: Programme Structure.

2. The 5ECTS modules Writing for Creative Media and Creativity & Innovation have been replaced with a new 10ECTS module entitled Storytelling, Creativity & Innovation. As suggested by the panel, this new module will focus more closely on entrepreneurial skills around idea generation and storytelling. It will also give students technical writing skills that will focus more closely on industry presentation.

3. The contact hours for Authoring for the Web have been corrected. The module has been written to allow open-ended changing of content to match updates to industry standards. The module’s lecturer will monitor these on an ongoing basis to ensure that the content matches the current industry standards, technologies and tools.

4. Web Frameworks is an extension of Java to incorporate web design, using a framework, building on students' existing Java knowledge. To introduce the .net framework would require the students to do the same in C#. It is felt that it would not be possible to expand the content to incorporate a second language within the module time frame. However, the content of this module is not language dependent, and a demonstration of a .net framework can be included in the content.

5. The Programme Board will work alongside the Work Placement Office to develop a feedback matrix which can be used to deliver information from the academic side to the industry partner. The Work Placement Office do monitor the perceived benefits and drawbacks of the work placement in an ongoing fashion and will continue to do so and to disseminate this information to the Programme Board.

6. Upon reflection and considering the time required for the delivery of the Research Methods module, it is currently considered that the Team Project module should remain separate from the Research Methods module. However, in response to the recommendation above, more research methods components will be introduced into the 4th year Team Project module. Greater emphasis will be given to using research more heavily at all stages of the project lifecycle, within the Team Project module, for example:

to inform the development of the student’s technical specialism;

to understand the market – for example by carrying out comparative analysis of prior products in the same specialist area, by performing user group analysis and by researching a products use context;

to systematically evaluate the impact of the chosen product;

to project future trends, for example using scenario planning to look at emergent products that can be built around the student’s selected technologies.





Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): The programme team should seek to use integrated assessments where appropriate.

RESPONSE

This Programme Board are in agreement with the above recommendation. Examples of potential and current integrated assessments are as follows:

Digital Photography deliverables (Semester 1) align naturally to create content for Introduction to Web Technologies (Semester 1/2) and Authoring for the Web (Semester 2).

A sample integrated project between Introduction to Programming, Digital Systems (both Semester 1) and Introduction to Web Technologies (Semester 1/2) would be for students to create a client-server website that displays knowledge of HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, and which will access and display information from a database using MySQL and PHP.

Group & Team Project modules (Semester 4, Semester 5, Semester 7 & Semester 8) could naturally integrate audio and visual assets from previous modules, alongside web and programming, human computer interaction and interface design skills.

A method for Project Management taught in Creative Media Project Management (Semester 4) could frame the Group Project (Semester 4) product lifecycle.

Within the Sound Design and Implementation module (Semester 8), students plan how they will develop or implement the audio within their group project. They create a sound design document which outlines the sound assets and sound aesthetic they are trying to achieve within the group project. They also create sound assets they can use within their group project, so the assessment is integrated.

Joint assessments already take place within two Semester 7 modules to be taught at Stage 4 of IADD, User Theories and Current Issues and Theories in Creative Media. These modules have previously shared assessments while part of the current BA (Hons) in Communications in Creative Multimedia. This was achieved through a group assessment that involved production of a machinima, a movie produced in a videogame engine and exploring a topical issue in new media. The production of the machinima movie was supervised in User Theories, while the narrative content and associated research was conducted during the Current Issues and Theories in Creative Media class. Both learning outcomes were assessed through a joint assessment involving a movie screening by each student group alongside peer feedback from the entire class.


4.14 Other Findings Condition(s) None. Recommendation(s): None. Response Response Report Approved By: Signed: Gerard (Bob) McKiernan

______________________________________________________ Dr Gerard Bob McKiernan, Head of School of Informatics and Creative Arts.


_________________________________________ Mr. Michael Hannon, Chairperson.

Date: 6th June 2014

Date post:	25-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Programmatic Review 2013-2014 Phase 2 Programmes · Academic Council Meeting No. 138 June 20th 2014...

Documents